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

efb · 16-05-2015 11:53PM

sup_dude wrote: »

I see the Prime Minister of Luxembourg has married his boyfriend today... I guess Luxembourg is going to fall into disrepair and chaos now.

They can't even fit their name on the map Joe!

Pherekydes · 16-05-2015 11:53PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

Even a narrow vote one way or the other with a low turnout is bad news as it will be clear that basically half the Country dont want same sex marriage.

Actually, only about 10% of the country want gay marriage. Two thirds of the rest don't see why they should be blocked from it.

The vast majority of yesses will be hetero.

Zhane · 16-05-2015 11:54PM

IngazZagni wrote: »

This is my opinion from conversation with friends and colleagues. Also some Twitter comments too. Tell me what good a no campaign poster with some paint brushed on it is doing?

Well on my journey through Dublin city centre today I didn't see any yes campaign posters defaced but I did see plenty of no campaign posters defaced.

http://thedailyedge.thejournal.ie/vandalised-mural-restored-2052575-Apr2015/https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/34im76/yes_posters_are_being_torn_down_in_galway/

https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/34im76/yes_posters_are_being_torn_down_in_galway/

Just two examples. Also, anybody can tear down a poster. The No posters themselves are insulting to ALOT of people here, from adoptive parents to single families. It could have been anybody.

IngazZagni · 16-05-2015 11:54PM

efb wrote: »

I didn't say it was doing any good.

Just anecdotal evidence - care to link a few twitter comment?

No because it's my opinion. I'm not trying to prove anything, I'm just making a point as a supporter of the yes side that I am concerned about this.

Not a NSA agent · 16-05-2015 11:54PM

gk5000 wrote: »

The point is that it is irresponsible to vote YES to change the constitution when we do not know the consequences.

Concensus does not confort me - remember the recent crash.

My point is - that up to this everybody was clear what a married mother and father were. Going forward nobody shall be sure - and none of this has been worked out in advance.

And lawyers......

You vote no for every referendum and dont vote in any general elections then?

Any change can lead to consequences.

How does the world manage with gay couples raising children currently?

Turtyturd · 16-05-2015 11:54PM

Shrap wrote: »

It's not even awkward! I've arranged swimming trips where there were fathers helping their daughters get changed and mothers helping their sons get changed. We're adults FFS. And parents. This is what we are supposed to do.

Yep, my son had swimming lessons recently where a 'parent' was required to attend because the teachers couldn't help the kids get changed. The idea of this kind of thing falling solely on mothers is two decades ago.

Bannasidhe · 16-05-2015 11:55PM

Shrap wrote: »

It's not even awkward! I've arranged swimming trips where there were fathers helping their daughters get changed and mothers helping their sons get changed. We're adults FFS. And parents. This is what we are supposed to do.

Went to Disney Paris with son and his two kids over Easter.

Legs walked off me.

On more than one occasion granddaughter announced she needed a wee and exhausted nanna said 'tell your father.'

Off they would trot...

gk5000 · 16-05-2015 11:57PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Handle how?

I arrived in back in Ireland in 1993 as half of a two mother's arrangement and basically we were two parents. That's it.
We both went to teacher parents things.
We both sat in hospitals after his latest lets see if I can roller blade along a wall/tree/garage roof escapade.
We did the household work as it needed doing.
Who ever wasn't working did the school runs.
I mostly did the cooking, she mostly did the hoovering. I did the gardening, she did the ironing. We both did DIY and supervised homework.
We just did the normal parenting stuff.

Same as all the other parents straight and gay.

No need for 'handling'

I don't want to handle your relationship with your wife so what on Earth makes you think you need to handle mine?

What you seem to have a problem realising is gay parents already exist and have done for decades. My son is 30 and he certainly isn't the oldest of those raised by same-sex parents. No matter what happens in the Referendum gay parents will continue to exist. A NO vote won't stop that. It is a fact of life and you will need to learn to accept that because you can't make it stop.

This referendum isn't about parenting - it's about if gay couples -some of whom are parents - get to marry.

I have no issue with gay parents, nor no issue with gay couples marrying IF the parrenting issue could be kept out of it for now.

By handling, I mean the Irish legal system does not know how to handle gay marriage. There is nothing in place. And it only takes one ssm couple to chalenge some law for discrimination to cause lots of issues and unknown consequences.

For instance - does who is on your kids birth cert now? and who shall go on if the child was born post ssm?

CiDeRmAn · 16-05-2015 11:57PM

gk5000 wrote: »

1. Love does not require marriage
2. This is not about making gays guilty or saying there is anything wrong with them
3. Do we insult the fish or the chips saying we want fish + chips as opposesd to fish + fish or chips + chips. Somethings just make more sense.
4. Its just saying that marriage is not for them, that is exclusivly for man+women.
5. You cannot give everybody what the want all of the time. This is tough, but true.

And this is utter rubbish, from start to finish.
Who are you to say if a two people committed to each other shouldn't marry?
An awful lot of people are using this entire debate to suggest exactly.that, that there is something g fundamentally wrong with being gay and something wrong with them being allowed to raise children.
You're third point is presupposing a natural order in which certain things belong together and its bullsh#t so I'll move on.
Marriage is clearly not for procreation, as sterile and post menopausal women are allowed marry opposite sex partners all the time, and marriage.allows two people to marry with constitutional protection, why shouldn't it be extended to all citizens of this state?
No, you can't give people what they want all of the time, but it is the mission of a civilised society to ensure equality of access to the benefits of living in that society to all of this its children. Marriage between straight people will be unaffected, the nature of their family will be unaffected.
These concepts will merely be broadened to accept same sex couples as equal, which they are.

Turtyturd · 16-05-2015 11:58PM

IngazZagni wrote: »

This is a democracy and a lot of "not sure's" will be swayed by silly things. It may not be right but it's the reality. It is doing damage to the yes campaign though, that I think is clear.

I still can't get my head around the 'not sures' tbh...you either believe in equality or you don't.

Anita Blow · 17-05-2015 12:00AM

gk5000 wrote: »

It's more difficult for men as they would need a surrogate mother, who typically would be paid, probably foreign and most likely would not be involved with the child.

Surrogacy is "messy" by its nature, but its the only way gay males can have a family - I think.

Adoption? How many gay Irish males or even heterosexual couples do you think have the tens of thousands of euro needed for commercial surrogacy?

CiDeRmAn · 17-05-2015 12:01AM

gk5000 wrote: »

I have no issue with gay parents, nor no issue with gay couples marrying IF the parrenting issue could be kept out of it for now.

By handling, I mean the Irish legal system does not know how to handle gay marriage. There is nothing in place. And it only takes one ssm couple to chalenge some law for discrimination to cause lots of issues and unknown consequences.

For instance - does who is on your kids birth cert now? and who shall go on if the child was born post ssm?

The issue of the birth cert is already there in terms of surrogacy used by straight couples, it is not a gay issue but an issue with the legal and legislative position on assisted reproductive rights and methods and will be challenged whether this referendum is passed or not.
To suggest it is a gay issue is disingenuous.

gandalf · 17-05-2015 12:01AM

gk5000 wrote: »

My own feeling is that most gay couples do not have or want children.

I'd agree with you about this. I would also say an increasing number of Hetero Married couples do not want children either based on the number of them who have chosen to remain childless.

Thereafter its reasonably easy for women, but any resultant child would not have a male father figure full time.
It's more difficult for men as they would need a surrogate mother, who typically would be paid, probably foreign and most likely would not be involved with the child.

What about single parents, divorced parents where one of the spouses have moved out of the country or widowed parents.

What you are wringing your hands about already exists in the real world and in reality it has nothing to do with marriage.

Surrogacy is "messy" by its nature, but its the only way gay males can have a family - I think.

But it has already been made clear that Surrogacy has nothing to do with this referendum. Whatever is decided by government about Surrogacy in the future will effect all prospective parents equally be they single people, gay people or married couples (gay or straight).

Have a read of this linked article. It debunks a lot of your "concerns".

http://www.iccl.ie/articles/yes-equality-myth-busters.html

Ash.J.Williams · 17-05-2015 12:01AM

I had a number of things to say about the post referring to the hypothetical gay parent on the female school trip, what's the point though ...possibly the silliest thing I've heard all campaign

Not a NSA agent · 17-05-2015 12:03AM

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

I had a number of things to say about the post referring to the hypothetical gay parent on the female school trip, what's the point though ...possibly the silliest thing I've heard all campaign

Banning the sale of chips without fish is my favorite.

road_high · 17-05-2015 12:03AM

Turtyturd wrote: »

I still can't get my head around the 'not sures' tbh...you either believe in equality or you don't.

The ones that were supposedly "Yes" that became Nos overnight because of the "nasty bullying" yes campaign are that ones that amuse me most tbh.
Generally were No anyhow but wanted a validation other than I don't like those icky gays which they were too cowardly to admit to in the first place.
You hit the nail in the head...you either believe in equality or you don't.

Ash.J.Williams · 17-05-2015 12:03AM

Haven't heard the word "floodgates" used yet....

gk5000 · 17-05-2015 12:04AM

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

You vote no for every referendum and dont vote in any general elections then?

Any change can lead to consequences.

How does the world manage with gay couples raising children currently?

They are not married, least in Ireland, and everybody has been doing ok.

IngazZagni · 17-05-2015 12:05AM

Turtyturd wrote: »

I still can't get my head around the 'not sures' tbh...you either believe in equality or you don't.

Have you been reading any of the comments here? Many have discussed exactly why.

Many in the yes camp seem far too optimistic and casual about all of this. Just take the UK election last week as an example. All the polls had Labour and the Conservatives neck and neck but on the day the shy Tory vote came out and they ended up winning an overall majority. There will be a huge shy no vote coming out next week and it should not be underestimated. I'm confident the yes side has enough people on their side, it's just a matter of getting them out and voting.

Fleawuss · 17-05-2015 12:07AM

Turtyturd wrote: »

I still can't get my head around the 'not sures' tbh...you either believe in equality or you don't.

The no campaign do not. What they have been working on is the old FUD principle of selling Shyte ie fear uncertainty doubt. They are trying to give hidden bigots permission to vote no behind a smokescreen of bs about surrogacy. What you are seeing is the new face of conservatism. Hiding ridiculous religious beliefs rooted in a primitive understanding of the world behind pseudo legal concerns. There is a battle for the future of Irish society developing: rational, equal and forward looking or, or the hierarchy, the Iona institute and the "comely maidens" brigade.

road_high · 17-05-2015 12:07AM

gk5000 wrote: »

They are not married, least in Ireland, and everybody has been doing ok.

How do you know? Have you asked every single gay parent/family that they are ok with not being recognised in the eyes of the law?

haveringchick · 17-05-2015 12:07AM

Anita Blow wrote: »

A friend was at his sister's confirmation earlier this week where the priest gave a lecture on voting no in the middle of the ceremony.

What's your point?

Bannasidhe · 17-05-2015 12:10AM

gk5000 wrote: »

I have no issue with gay parents, nor no issue with gay couples marrying IF the parrenting issue could be kept out of it for now.

By handling, I mean the Irish legal system does not know how to handle gay marriage. There is nothing in place. And it only takes one ssm couple to chalenge some law for discrimination to cause lots of issues and unknown consequences.

For instance - does who is on your kids birth cert now? and who shall go on if the child was born post ssm?

How is the parenting going to be kept out of it exactly?
Do same-sex couples who are currently parents agree not to get married?
Do they hand their kids over for adoption?

Do gay couples who are getting married agree to get sterilised?

Should ALL gay couples who want to get married be denied because some selfish Lesbians and gay men went and procreated before being granted permission? I mean, everyone knows straight people get permission first right.

The Draft of the Head of the Marriage Bill has been published. It is on the Dept of Justice's website, there is a link to it on the Referendum Commission's web site. Instead of running around intoning we'rrrre dooooomed! DOOOOMMMMEEEED! Why not read the Bill? See what is proposed.

Look - here is a link :http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/General%20Scheme%20of%20the%20Marriage%20Bill%202015.pdf/Files/General%20Scheme%20of%20the%20Marriage%20Bill%202015.pdf

It's there. They have thought about this. They wrote down the plan.

The legal system cannot handle it until they see the legislation - that is one of the reason the draft has been published.

The Irish legal system also couldn't handle divorce until they saw the legislation.
They couldn't handle bloody penalty points until they say the legislation (ok... there were issues with penalty points so bad example

)

gk5000 · 17-05-2015 12:11AM

Anita Blow wrote: »

Adoption? How many gay Irish males or even heterosexual couples do you think have the tens of thousands of euro needed for commercial surrogacy?

I was just answering a question.

Adoption? There is very little of that in Ireland, either in country or foreign - and foreign adoption probaby costs just as much as surrogacy.

And some countries would not allow adoption to gay couples - Russia I think.

And there is a possibility that some countries would cancel all foreign adoptions rather than allow gay couples.

And this is back to another point - most gay couples do not have or want children.

ronivek · 17-05-2015 12:11AM

Turtyturd wrote: »

I still can't get my head around the 'not sures' tbh...you either believe in equality or you don't.

I firmly believe the majority of the 'Not Sure' camp have already decided they don't like same-sex marriage or equality for homosexuals; but are probably afraid to admit it or simply searching for a way to verbalise their irrational apprehension.

Maybe some of them will decide to vote 'Yes' because they just can't find a genuine reason; but I'm doubtful it will be any kind of significant proportion.

Similarly those who are supposedly voting 'No' because of the supposed conduct of the 'Yes' campaign. It's a lot easier for people to persuade themselves they're voting 'No' as some sort of righteous defence of democracy and decency rather than facing the truth about their own biases and prejudice.

I'm sure all those 'No' voters will be able to sleep better at night next to their husband or wife protected by the constitution and laws of the land; if they can convince themselves their vote has nothing to do with prejudice, bigotry, bias, or religious dogma.

osarusan · 17-05-2015 12:12AM

haveringchick wrote: »

What's your point?

The funny thing is, to quote this post, you presumably read it, and the post it replied to and quoted, which suggested the inappropriacy of canvassing outside a church.

So, the point is - the no campaign is canvassing inside the church.

Hope that clears it up.

SaveOurLyric · 17-05-2015 12:12AM

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Haven't heard the word "floodgates" used yet....

That would be the thin edge of the wedge, all havoc would break loose, and it would lead to the breakdown of civil society as we know it. Think of the children.

gk5000 · 17-05-2015 12:15AM

road_high wrote: »

How do you know? Have you asked every single gay parent/family that they are ok with not being recognised in the eyes of the law?

Hang on, thought the Yes side were saying childrens rights were not affected etc......

osarusan · 17-05-2015 12:15AM

gk5000 wrote: »

I have no issue with gay parents, nor no issue with gay couples marrying IF the parrenting issue could be kept out of it for now.

By handling, I mean the Irish legal system does not know how to handle gay marriage. There is nothing in place. And it only takes one ssm couple to chalenge some law for discrimination to cause lots of issues and unknown consequences.

For instance - does who is on your kids birth cert now? and who shall go on if the child was born post ssm?

Hey, thanks for answering all my questions, i appreciate it.

I wanted to say - some of the points you made in your posts have basically been disproven, and some of the replies from other posters, suggest to me that you haven't really researched this very much, and that quite a bit of what you see as 'unknown' is actually 'known', and not really a very valid argument.

So i was wondering about your perspective on this posting exchange - do you think you've made your position clear or do you think you learned something new through posting?

Bannasidhe · 17-05-2015 12:17AM

gk5000 wrote: »

I was just answering a question.

Adoption? There is very little of that in Ireland, either in country or foreign - and foreign adoption probaby costs just as much as surrogacy.

And some countries would not allow adoption to gay couples - Russia I think.

And there is a possibility that some countries would cancel all foreign adoptions rather than allow gay couples.

And this is back to another point - most gay couples do not have or want children.

If you have no problem with gay marriage as such just concerns about children but most gay couple do not have or want children ...

I'm struggling to see what your problem is...

It's like saying you want to ban alcohol, not because you are anti alcohol but some people abuse alcohol - not most people, Most people drink alcohol responsibly or not at all

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

Comments