Same Sex Marriage Referendum Mega Thread - MOD WARNING IN FIRST POST

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Out of curiosity is it your first time ever canvassing?

Yes it was. Was a bit nerve wracking at first but got better as it went on.

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Canvassing today went well. I feel very encouraged at the amount of people I encountered who were definate yes voters. No one was particularly rude either thankfully. I was standing on the street handing out yes badges and pamphlets that show people how to get voting reminders text to them, and the amount of people who wanted to wear a yes badge made me feel very hopeful. And I was in the heart of small town rural Ireland. There were a few filthy looks and sour faces but not many.

Good on you. I wandered around the shops on Grafton St. in Dublin with my wife earlier and was very impressed with the amount of people wearing Yes badges (as were we). This included a fair amount of older people, and a couple of very elderly little old ladies which brought a smile to my face.

Walking into M&S a random old man growled "No" at my wife. Unfortunately I was a bit ahead of her so missed it happening. I would have gone through him for a shortcut. Mind you, he'd probably have just told a story about how he was attacked by the Yes side rather than for the fact he was a dick and made my wife feel threatened.

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties have published the following to dispel any fears that undecided voters may have and to clear up some of the myths surrounding the Referendum ---

YES EQUALITY MYTH-BUSTERS
Inline Image
Rebutting the 5 Biggest “No Equality” Myths

MYTH No 1

CHILDREN
“No Equality” say: this referendum would “take away” the “right” of children to a mother and a father and “give legal protection to the idea that there is nothing special about the love of a father or the love of a mother”.

UNTRUE. As the Chair of the independent Referendum Commission has confirmed, there never has been a “right” of a child to a mother and a father. It’s perfectly obvious that every child has a biological mother and father, but children in Ireland have always been raised in a whole variety of different kinds of families. We all know that many different kinds of families are equally capable of raising well-adjusted, happy children. Children have a right to a secure and loving home.

It is ridiculous and insulting to suggest that extending civil marriage to same sex couples will have any impact on the love of any mother or father, gay or straight, for their children.

MYTH No 2

CIVIL PARTNERSHIP
“No Equality” say: civil partnership is “almost identical” to civil marriage. “Gay and lesbian men have an equal right to respect and protection, but that shouldn’t mean destroying the meaning of marriage”.

UNTRUE. Civil partnership does not give same sex couples “almost identical” rights to marriage. Only married people are recognised as “constitutional families”. This means that the State has a permanent legal duty to ensure that their family rights cannot be whittled away. Couples in civil partnerships do not enjoy this level of legal protection.
It is also untrue that the meaning of marriage will be changed by voting yes in the referendum. Civil marriage will be extended to same sex couples and religious marriage will be completely untouched. No church will be obliged to marry same sex couples.

MYTH No 3

SURROGACY
“No Equality” say: marriage for same sex couples leads to a demand for more surrogacy “since two men can’t have a baby without a surrogate mother” and that voting yes to civil marriage equality would be to “go down the road of babies made to order”.

UNTRUE. As the Chair of the independent Referendum Commission has confirmed, surrogacy has nothing at all to do with this referendum. Judge Cross has said “at the present moment, surrogacy is not regulated at all. There is no right of access in law and there is no right to prohibit anybody accessing surrogacy. The government has plans to regulate surrogacy; we don't know how they will be regulated but it is going to be regulated independent of the outcome of this referendum”. When surrogacy is regulated, any new legal rules will apply equally strongly to same sex and to opposite sex couples.

Voting yes or no will have no impact on the rules that apply to surrogacy.

MYTH No 4

ADOPTION
“NO Equality” say: the referendum will lead to “gay adoption” and “if the referendum passes, it will be constitutionally impossible for adoption law to try to ensure that an adopted child is provided with both a mother and a father, as a first choice”.

UNTRUE. As the Chair of the Adoption Authority has made clear, the result of the referendum will not affect the adoption process. Since 1991, a person who is in a same sex or opposite sex cohabiting relationship can apply to adopt, and many children are already being raised by same sex couples. The “best interests of the child” is the key requirement when adoption decisions are made and, as Geoffrey Shannon has said: “if the birth mother decides that she does not want to place her child with a same-sex couple, that decision will invariably be respected”.

Voting yes or no will have no impact on the rules that apply to adoption.

MYTH No 5

EQUALITY
“No Equality” say: “the truth is this vote is not about equality”, that people who want to vote no are being “bullied”, family businesses “threatened” and primary schools will be told what they must teach about marriage “whatever parents believe”.

UNTRUE. This referendum is about one thing only, extending civil marriage equality, giving equal rights to equal citizens. In Ireland, robust anti-discrimination laws already outlaw discrimination on the basis of gender or sexual orientation and that will remain the case whether or not the referendum passes.
The right to religious freedom is very important and is already protected by the Constitution and other laws. However, it does not include a right to discriminate against other people because of your own personal beliefs. Ireland is a generally tolerant country, in which very few people believe that their personal religious convictions entitle them to dictate how other people should live their lives. The only “bullies” in this referendum campaign are those behaving as if they should be able to enforce their beliefs on other people.

As for religious schools, they already enjoy specific legal protection at both constitutional and statutory level that strongly protects their rights to provide teaching in line with the religious convictions of parents.

Voting yes or no will have no impact on Ireland’s anti-discrimination laws or on laws protecting religious freedom.


Published by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties – www.iccl.ie

Together with its partner organisations GLEN and Marriage Equality, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties is leading the Yes Equality 2015 Campaign for civil marriage equality

www.yesequality.ie

Lockjaw McGrath wrote: »

You sound like reasonable sort all the same.

Don't worry I didn't mean physical violence. But I'm quite happy to have words with a random stranger who mistreats my wife. Call me old fashioned I guess.

tayto lover wrote: »

MYTH No 1

CHILDREN
“No Equality” say: this referendum would “take away” the “right” of children to a mother and a father and “give legal protection to the idea that there is nothing special about the love of a father or the love of a mother”.

It will give legal protection to that there is nothing special about a male father or female mother which currently exists, and that there is nothing special about the male + female union.

Shrap wrote: »

I tried giving this person the benefit of the doubt here, and asked outright whether he just meant keeping animals or having "relationships" with animals, but got no reply to

In fairness the poster was banned, so is unable to clarify or defend their view. So don't expect a response.

In their post they did not mention "sexual" anywhere, so you are reaching, or at least making an assumption there.
(Sexual wouldn't be automatically added in my mind when kids and animals are mentioned).
Only the poster who posted knows really, and they are banned, arguably harshly.

Anyways,
1) a relationship with a child who you live with or are somehow financially interdependent with can be "made official" through having your name on the birth cert as parent, otherwise an Adoption Cert, Foster Cert or whatever else depending on the circumstances. There are also inheritance laws linking you with the child (if applicable), as well as official processes where social services can intervene

2) a relationship with animals could be made official through a Pet Licence or if you're a farmer the relevant ownership certification or processes.
You are linked to the animal officially that somebody else cannot just grab them and claim them.
There are are processes around this, and legal rights given

3) if 2 people are of the same gender and want to be linked officially there is civil partnership (no proof needed they have a sexual relationship, or are gay at all)

The question of whether any or all of systems 1,2&3 above should be either reformed, or reclassified under a new definition of marriage, is a matter of opinion.

keeponhurling wrote: »

In fairness the poster was banned, so is unable to clarify or defend their view. So don't expect a response.

In their post they did not mention "sexual" anywhere, so you are reaching, or at least making an assumption there.
(Sexual wouldn't be automatically added in my mind when kids and animals are mentioned).
Only the poster who posted knows really, and they are banned, arguably harshly.

He mentioned marrying animals and children; the clear implication being that a homosexual marrying another homosexual was equivalent to a "normal" person marrying an animal or a child. Marriage tends to include a sexual relationship; so it's a pretty simple leap from there.

MrWalsh wrote: »

Eh no, it will allow same sex marriage.

Heterosexual couples will still be allowed to get married and be all special.

Future legislation shall have to cater for men+men and women+women as opposed to just man+women, so the man+women is not longer special.

opiniated wrote: »

I'm astonished at the amount of time people have to devote to this thread.
I haven't had time to read even half of it!

I'm no constitutional lawyer, but I'm unconvinced that this referendum, if passed, will have no effect on the rights of the traditional family. I believe that every action has a reaction, and cannot see how it could be otherwise in this situation. I don't believe that any possible consequences for future legislation have been adequately discussed. It's all been "It's only about SSM" The fact that it is in the family section of the Constitution is ignored.

For this reason, I will vote "No", with a heavy heart - because if the individual differences between Marriage and Civil Partnerships were voted on, I'd approve giving the same rights to gay couples in a heartbeat!

For those of you who are gay, please do not take this as a slur on you personally, or as lack of respect for you, or your rights.
It is about not having unintended consequences, and being unsure of what those consequences might be.

A very minor bugbear, is unease at the number of corporations, celebrities, and political parties advocating a "Yes" vote. I can't see what business it is of any Company, political party, or celebrity, how a sovereign nation votes. It doesn't anger me enough to change how I would vote - I suppose I'm just mentioning that I resent being told what to do. I regard it as an insult to my intelligence to think that because famous person Y or B is in favour of SSM (or more likely, looking for publicity!), they are arrogant enough to think that their viewpoint is sufficiently important to affect how I think.

You should add a TL;DR at the end there: "I'm voting no because I'm afraid that same sex marriages will be treated the same as heterosexual marriages under the law."

All you had to say was you don't agree with same sex marriage or equal rights for same sex couples; at least have the courage to say that.

ronivek wrote: »

You should add a TL;DR at the end there: "I'm voting no because I'm afraid that same sex marriages will be treated the same as heterosexual marriages under the law."

All you had to say was you don't agree with same sex marriage or equal rights for same sex couples; at least have the courage to say that.

Are you unable to read ? Or did you reply to the wrong post

Support plummeting for a yes vote in the marriage referendum according to tomorrows poll.
Yes 53% down 13% since their last poll.
No 24% up 3%
Dont know 23% up 10%.

They make the same mistake as with polls from previous polls for other referendums, where the don know went heavily no. Yet pollster always give more to Yes.
So when don't know are excluded:
Yes 69% down 7%
No 31% up 7%.

If trend continues I think the No side could win.