Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

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

1…139140142144145…327

Comments

  • #4232
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 18,046 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    K4t wrote: »
    What I can't understand myself is how Irish people could be fooled and controlled in their thinking by the Catholic Church in 2015, after all of the history and misery.
    I doubt many are even aware that a lot of the backing for the No side comes from ultra-conservative Catholic groups like Iona who very much have their own agenda.


  • #4233
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,775 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    floggg wrote: »
    Lol. A court over-turning what was established to be an arbitrary and pernicious form of discrimination which served no legitimate purpose whatsoever (which was established as a matter of fact in the resulting court cases) was shameful?

    And I guess the courts in the U.S. where also shameful for opposing the will of the southern states to discriminate.

    Letting courts decide is divisive in issues like abortion and same sex marriage, or simply by legislation without asking the people.

    Isn't it better to have the people with you, given same sex marriage is not a right. Rather than imposing things against the will of the people?
    The people may well vote for same sex marriage, they may not, but it is sad that some see democracy being somehow 'shameful' if the result doesn't suit.


  • #4234
    frostyjacks
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭frostyjacks


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    Why did the Bishops comments about what schools will be allowed to teach about 'homosexual acts' get front page over Varadkars rational, fair logical comments?

    And please tell me exactly what schools are currently allowed to teach about 'homosexual acts', because of my child ever comes home and tells me that he was told anything that includes the words 'abomination', 'sin', 'wrong', 'unnatural' or anything even slightly derogatory, I will be going straight to the human rights commission.

    Schools need to cop onto their social responsibility and their responsibility to their students. Surely this has to come before 'ethos' in areas like this where there is a major clash!

    No wonder our hospitals are like something from sub-Saharan Africa. The minister for health is too busy leading the charge of the lgbt brigade.


  • #4235
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,398 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    traprunner wrote: »
    Gamblers realise it will be closer than the poll suggests and the odds are attractive. I still think Yes with 55-60% but that would be close enough for many gamblers to take a punt with the high No odds.

    I think gambling on referendums or elections should be banned. The chance of a quick buck can distort what the population really want.

    Really? You think people will decide how to vote because they have wagered on the outcome?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #4236
    mailforkev
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,829 ✭✭✭mailforkev


    homerjay2005 wrote: »
    and do you happen to have an answer to my question about figures on where gay marraige is allowed?

    Full marriage equality is available in 21 countries as far as I remember. This includes some very catholic countries like Argentina.

    Unsurprisingly, if you were to make a list of countries you would actually like to live in they are pretty much all on the list.


  • Advertisement
  • #4237
    traprunner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,887 ✭✭✭traprunner


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Really? You think people will decide how to vote because they have wagered on the outcome?

    There are idiots in all walks of life. It will happen for sure.


  • #4238
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    homerjay2005 wrote: »
    why we worried what the Spanish would think!!??

    there are multiple countries that this referendum wouldnt be allowed to take place and/or wouldnt pass if it was, so i am not sure if using what others would think of us as being a reason to vote yes is a correct approach. or in other words, there will also be many countries that will find it strange if it does pass...it works both ways.


    out of the 200+ countries in the world right now, does anybody have a list of how many of them actually allow it?

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/World_marriage-equality_laws.svg/863px-World_marriage-equality_laws.svg.png

    Its a minority of countries but that minority are the ones we view as progressive.

    I wouldnt take human rights lessons from the likes of Saudi Arabia.


  • #4239
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,398 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    ixoy wrote: »
    I doubt many are even aware that a lot of the backing for the No side comes from ultra-conservative Catholic groups like Iona who very much have their own agenda.

    Of course they have their own agenda. As do all involved in campaigns. People without agendas tend not to get involved in political campaigns.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #4240
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 18,046 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Isn't it better to have the people with you, given same sex marriage is not a right. Rather than imposing things against the will of the people?
    There's the problem that can lead to the tyranny of the majority. It's the sort of thinking that would have led to bans on interracial marriage persisting if it was left to common votes everywhere.


  • #4241
    kunst nugget
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭kunst nugget


    frostyjacks wrote: »
    No wonder our hospitals are like something from sub-Saharan Africa. The minister for health is too busy leading the charge of the lgbt brigade.

    Yes, taking time to write one article in favour of the Yes vote is what has been the undoing of the health service…


  • Advertisement
  • #4242
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,398 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    mailforkev wrote: »
    Full marriage equality is available in 21 countries as far as I remember. This includes some very catholic countries like Argentina.

    Unsurprisingly, if you were to make a list of countries you would actually like to live in they are pretty much all on the list.

    And Ireland would be the first country to put same same marriage in its constitution. This could be seen as being progressive as the smoking ban, if you are pro, or the unleashing of sodom and gomorrah if you are anti.
    There are far too many chicken lickens on both sides.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #4243
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    homerjay2005 wrote: »
    and maybe you should read all my post properly before accusing me of going on a rant also.

    and do you happen to have an answer to my question about figures on where gay marraige is allowed?



    do we??? i wouldnt even have Spain in the top 10 taking everything into account.

    I did read you post - you ranted about why should we care what Spain thinks. Where did Beardedlady say we should care?

    Am I your research assistant?
    You can google it yourself.

    Sure, what do we have in common with a country that is in severe financial difficulty, spent much of the 20th century under the control of governments to the right allied with the RCC church and is still overwhelmingly Catholic - the idea is absurd.
    We are obviously far closer to the Scandinavian countries with their generally socialist outlook, universal free health care etc etc.
    Or to Lutheran Germany with it's large industrial manufacturing base.


  • #4244
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    ixoy wrote: »
    I doubt many are even aware that a lot of the backing for the No side comes from ultra-conservative Catholic groups like Iona who very much have their own agenda.

    What makes you so sure that the No Side are even influenced by the Roman Catholic Church or groups like Iona? That is the best ye got?


  • #4245
    Cantona's Collars
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,709 ✭✭✭✭Cantona's Collars


    A leaflet on behalf of Iona/No campaign arrived in my letterbox this morning,pretty insulting to single parents never mind same sex couples.They seem to be missing the whole point of the referendum.


  • #4246
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Of course they have their own agenda. As do all involved in campaigns. People without agendas tend not to get involved in political campaigns.
    They're not involved in a political campaign so much as an anti civil rights campaign. Do you not think it strange and slightly ironic that this political campaign you speak of, is supported by all of the main Irish political parties. FF and FG, Sinn Fein and Labour, Paul Murphy and the AAA, People Before Profit. They have all put aside their political differences and absolute loathing for each other for all things political, to get behind this movement for equality. Iona have an agenda alright, and it's poisonous.


  • #4247
    Shrap
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    What makes you so sure that the No Side are even influenced by the Roman Catholic Church or groups like Iona? That is the best ye got?

    *COUGH, SPLUTTER* Thanks, keyboard now covered in coffee :(

    Pull the other one mate. And here's a little interactive connectivity map that is quite fun and educational for all - missing a number of connections that even I know of, but still a good start.
    http://bocktherobber.com/godsquad/godsquad.html


  • #4248
    WoolyJumper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 849 ✭✭✭WoolyJumper


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Letting courts decide is divisive in issues like abortion and same sex marriage, or simply by legislation without asking the people.

    Isn't it better to have the people with you, given same sex marriage is not a right. Rather than imposing things against the will of the people?
    The people may well vote for same sex marriage, they may not, but it is sad that some see democracy being somehow 'shameful' if the result doesn't suit.

    That's a matter of opinion and I think it's safe to say most gay people consider their rights on the line, as well as their dignity and value in society. I'm not sure how I feel about the majority of people being able to impose their "ideals" about marriage and decide whether I can get married to the person I love or not. Especially when it will have absolutely no impact on their lives what so ever.

    Anyway I'll keep smiling and nodding for the next four days while people continue to discuss the kind of person I am, what I should and should not be allowed to do, my ability to love, marry, my effect on society, children and whether im some kind of deviant or not. Just 4 more days.


  • #4249
    mailforkev
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,829 ✭✭✭mailforkev


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    What makes you so sure that the No Side are even influenced by the Roman Catholic Church or groups like Iona? That is the best ye got?

    What a strange question.

    Many of the most prominent No campaigners are either members of, or affiliated with, Iona.

    Even they themselves wouldn't deny that if asked.


  • #4250
    Andre Salmon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 155 ✭✭Andre Salmon


    The No campaign is pathetic, mainly lies and homophobic propaganda.
    I am amazed they are given a media platform to spout all this rubbish.
    My wife (who was adopted) finds the mother and father posters offensive.
    Yes votes from both of us.
    My very religious in-laws will be voting yes as well.


  • #4251
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,398 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Just curious about voting intentions in the presidential age referendum.
    Will pro SSM voters tend to favour a yes vote in the presedential age referendum and no voters also be opposed to the reduction in age or is their any correlation between the 2?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Advertisement
  • #4252
    traprunner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,887 ✭✭✭traprunner


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Just curious about voting intentions in the presidential age referendum.
    Will pro SSM voters tend to favour a yes vote in the presedential age referendum and no voters also be opposed to the reduction in age or is their any correlation between the 2?

    Interesting question but you'll possibly get a better reply here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=95511928


  • #4253
    frostyjacks
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭frostyjacks


    kunst nugget wrote: »
    Yes, taking time to write one article in favour of the Yes vote is what has been the undoing of the health service…

    His responsibility is health, not gay marriage. The time he spent penning that drivel would have been better spent on sorting out the many problems in his dept.


  • #4254
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,398 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    K4t wrote: »
    They're not involved in a political campaign so much as an anti civil rights campaign. Do you not think it strange and slightly ironic that this political campaign you speak of, is supported by all of the main Irish political parties. FF and FG, Sinn Fein and Labour, Paul Murphy and the AAA, People Before Profit. They have all put aside their political differences and absolute loathing for each other for all things political, to get behind this movement for equality. Iona have an agenda alright, and it's poisonous.

    One could argue that in the absence of any political leadership Iona filled a vacuum in representing the many citizens opposed to the change in the constitution.

    Do you think that the political parties supporting a yes vote are without an agenda? If so they could have left it up to individual members to decide how to vote.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #4255
    mailforkev
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,829 ✭✭✭mailforkev


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Just curious about voting intentions in the presidential age referendum.
    Will pro SSM voters tend to favour a yes vote in the presedential age referendum and no voters also be opposed to the reduction in age or is their any correlation between the 2?

    I'd say there will be no connection really. I'll vote yes, my wife no i think. Both of us are very strong yes marriage supporters.

    I think that referendum was dead in the water before it even began.


  • #4256
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Letting courts decide is divisive in issues like abortion and same sex marriage, or simply by legislation without asking the people.

    Isn't it better to have the people with you, given same sex marriage is not a right. Rather than imposing things against the will of the people?
    The people may well vote for same sex marriage, they may not, but it is sad that some see democracy being somehow 'shameful' if the result doesn't suit.

    Do you think its "democracy" for the majority to have power to determine the rights of the minority?

    It's certainly not the type of liberal democracy we are supposed to live in.

    The fact that a majority of people endorsed a moral wrong does not cure it of its wrongness.

    For example, a majority of people in the US would have voted against lifting the ban on inter-racial marriage. Would that have been better than the courts striking it down as unjust discrimination.

    A majority of people in the North used the political system to restrict the rights of Catholics. Was that just because it was the will of the people?

    A majority of voters would also have endorsed the criminalisation of homosexuality in ireland (and elsewhere) at various points. Would that have been just?

    Democracy is indeed shameful when it is used to restrict the rights of minorities and perpetrate wrongs.

    I very much doubt you stand over the legitimacy of a "democratic" vote to strip the rights of a particular racial group, so pretending that a majority vote can't produce wrongs or injustice is naive at best.


  • #4257
    WoolyJumper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 849 ✭✭✭WoolyJumper


    Andre Salmon wrote: »
    The No campaign is pathetic, mainly lies and homophobic propaganda.
    I am amazed they are given a media platform to spout all this rubbish.
    My wife (who was adopted) finds the mother and father posters offensive.
    Yes votes from both of us.
    My very religious in-laws will be voting yes as well.

    I was talking to my Dad last night, he said he lost his cool with a no campaigner because he said to him every child needs a mother and father. My Dad said "tell that to my Mother, who did a damn fine job of raising 8 kids under the age of 10 alone after my father Died"


  • #4258
    DARK-KNIGHT
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,298 ✭✭✭✭DARK-KNIGHT


    Im voting no on the day















    to lowering the age for presidential candidates... :D yes for equality though


  • #4259
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 18,046 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Do you think that the political parties supporting a yes vote are without an agenda?
    Of course they do. I do believe though that some of them would genuinely believe it - the more Left leaning anyway (Sinn Fein) for example.

    Certainly the further left-leaning would such as the SWP. I got a leaflet in from the Anti-Austerity Alliance who had a piece on it and cutting off the ties to the church. I do believe they support it truly.


  • #4260
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 18,046 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »
    Im voting no on the day
    Any particular reason?


  • Advertisement
  • #4261
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Just curious about voting intentions in the presidential age referendum.
    Will pro SSM voters tend to favour a yes vote in the presedential age referendum and no voters also be opposed to the reduction in age or is their any correlation between the 2?

    Two separate issues but personally I am voting yes in both.
    I have read comments which say 21 it too young but seem to ignore that 21 would be the minimum age - why should a 33 year old be barred?

    Some people think no-one under 35 would have the gravitas, knowledge and necessary experience necessary - well, I seem to remember Dana and Sean Gallagher running the last time - one wanted to bring religion back and the other promised jobs. Both seemed confused as to what the President does...
    Plus Micheal Collins died when he was 32... I may not agree with all of his politics but in terms of gravatis, knowledge and experience he nailed it.

    Lack of knowledge of the Constitution is also mooted as a reason to vote no - seem to recall Dana saying she wouldn't sign any legislation that conflicted with her religious belief - can't top that for lack of knowledge.

    Annnnd... Jesus died before age 35 and look what he accomplished :pac:


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement