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

Ironé · 18-05-2015 07:59PM

joe40 wrote: »

An argument i have heard put forward by the no side is that in the event of a yes vote same sex couples that get married would have a "right to procreate" and since this is not biologically possible, surrogacy would have to be granted to them. i think that is the gist of the argument if not I can be corrected.

My question for the NO side is this:

plenty of heterosexual couples are infertile for one reason or another therefore why have they not been demanding surrogacy as a matter of right for many years now.

I know it is not regulated so is actually happening at the moment. However as far as know the idea, that a married couple have a "right to procreate" is not been used by heterosexual married couples as a reason to demand surrogacy.

Great question - and I would be interested to here the response from a No voter.

Further to this how exactly do they envision surrogacy being a right that has to be granted to gay men? Would it be enshrined in law that they would be given use of their choice of woman of child bearing age?

Shrap · 18-05-2015 07:59PM

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Oh for fecks sake Robert! Did you never have a crush on a girl as a young child? A teacher? If yes, that mean you wanted to have heterosexual sex with them? I had my first crush on a boy in junior infants.

In first class, I told everyone in my school that I was going to marry Nicky (male) when we got older. I didn't have a notion how babies were made, but I knew I liked him. 1st class = 6 years old.

RobertKK · 18-05-2015 08:01PM

marienbad wrote: »

Now you are even compounding it , I wasn't even thinking that way . The questions you keep posing to an individual were enough for me !

Well that is the only thing that made sense from the post, as prurience means lustfu or desires, along with the word unsavoury, and given what was being discussed, it could be implying something really wrong.
The words used by you were not the best, as people reading that could come to a horrible conclusion.
I take your word that it was not what you meant, but one could interpret it and come to a truly unsavoury conclusion.

tomwaterford · 18-05-2015 08:02PM

Shrap wrote: »

In first class, I told everyone in my school that I was going to marry Nicky (male) when we got older. I didn't have a notion how babies were made, but I knew I liked him. 1st class = 6 years old.

I do get reminded myself and a neighbour child the same age used be chasing each other kissing in the car journey home when we were like 7/8

Mortifying to think on it :O

jobbridge4life · 18-05-2015 08:03PM

Shrap wrote: »

In first class, I told everyone in my school that I was going to marry Nicky (male) when we got older. I didn't have a notion how babies were made, but I knew I liked him. 1st class = 6 years old.

LoL

I have too many of these embarrassing stories. As I mentioned earlier when my two childhood companions Ciara and Phillip compared 'naughty parts' we were shocked to discover that we all were a little different. Ciara obviously being the outlier but Phillip and I didn't know which of us was the 'proper' boy. A few years later I realised why. I was circumcised and Phillip wasn't.

marienbad · 18-05-2015 08:03PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Well that is the only thing that made sense from the post, as prurience means lustfu or desires, along with the word unsavoury, and given what was being discussed, it could be implying something really wrong.
The words used by you were not the best, as people reading that could come to a horrible conclusion.
I take your word that it was not what you meant, but one could interpret it and come to a truly unsavoury conclusion.

Not at all Robert and I never interpreted your posts in that particular manner . Apologies if that was the impression I gave ,it was not my intention.

6am7f9zxrsjvnb · 18-05-2015 08:04PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Jan O' Sullivan was saying today it would be wrong to have a book for a child in school that displayed same sex relationships, as in having a fairytale story with a King and a king...she on the Yes side.

It would be weird. Inform any six year old about the referendum and watch their nose scrunch up.

jobbridge4life · 18-05-2015 08:04PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Well that is the only thing that made sense from the post, as prurience means lustfu or desires, along with the word unsavoury, and given what was being discussed, it could be implying something really wrong.
The words used by you were not the best, as people reading that could come to a horrible conclusion.
I take your word that it was not what you meant, but one could interpret it and come to a truly unsavoury conclusion.

I can't imagine what it must be like to have such darkness and filth on the mind. Its just too sad to even imagine. What a horrible world you must see this as.

Shrap · 18-05-2015 08:04PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Well that is the only thing that made sense from the post, as prurience means lustfu or desires, along with the word unsavoury, and given what was being discussed, it could be implying something really wrong.
The words used by you were not the best, as people reading that could come to a horrible conclusion.
I take your word that it was not what you meant, but one could interpret it and come to a truly unsavoury conclusion.

Interestingly, it was your suggestion that a child of 5 would be thinking about sex that led to the suggestion that your comment was prurient. Which it was.

Bannasidhe · 18-05-2015 08:04PM

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Ah, well in that case, everything she says is correct and every yes voter agrees with her. We decided this at the clubhouse last week.

I didn't.

I voted No.

RobertKK · 18-05-2015 08:04PM

:cool:

marienbad wrote: »

Not at all Robert and I never interpreted your posts in that particular manner . Apologies if that was the impression I gave ,it was not my intention.

hugs.

jobbridge4life · 18-05-2015 08:05PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I didn't.

I voted No.

You can hand back your lesbian vagina at your local gay bathouse. Replacement straight parts expected in two to three weeks.

Shrap · 18-05-2015 08:06PM

tomwaterford wrote: »

I do get reminded myself and a neighbour child the same age used be chasing each other kissing in the car journey home when we were like 7/8

Mortifying to think on it :O

Not embarrassed any more thankfully. It seems we get the fcuk over ourselves when faced with the next generation doing the same things!

Shrap · 18-05-2015 08:07PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I didn't.

I voted No.

Me too. Am I going to get lesbian parts in the replacement post? :pac:

Kiwi in IE · 18-05-2015 08:08PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Jan O' Sullivan was saying today it would be wrong to have a book for a child in school that displayed same sex relationships, as in having a fairytale story with a King and a king...she on the Yes side.

There is a book called Tabby McTat, by Julia Donaldson (Gruffalo author), has been one of my child's favourite books since he was about 3 and we have read it 1000 times. It's about a cat who goes to live with 2 women, Prunella and Pat. The book does not elude to what their relationship is, but I think they are a couple. My son asked me once if Pat was Prunella's mum. I said "I think she is her wife, sometimes girls marry girls and boys marry boys". The whole issue was normalised just like that.

I listened to Jim Walsh and Breda O'Brien rant on during The Last Word on Today FM about how normalising LGBT relationships in schools is 'sexualising children'. Can you explain to me how the above equates to sexualising my child, or even what could possibly be considered wrong with it?

marienbad · 18-05-2015 08:09PM

RobertKK wrote: »

:cool:

hugs.

Now now Robert ,steady on , lets wait until Saturday and see are we hugging then

Not a NSA agent · 18-05-2015 08:09PM

joe40 wrote: »

An argument i have heard put forward by the no side is that in the event of a yes vote same sex couples that get married would have a "right to procreate" and since this is not biologically possible, surrogacy would have to be granted to them. i think that is the gist of the argument if not I can be corrected.

My question for the NO side is this:

plenty of heterosexual couples are infertile for one reason or another therefore why have they not been demanding surrogacy as a matter of right for many years now.

I know it is not regulated so is actually happening at the moment. However as far as know the idea, that a married couple have a "right to procreate" is not been used by heterosexual married couples as a reason to demand surrogacy.

Even then its been shown that nobody has the absolute right to procreate. You are free to naturally procreate or apply for adoption but you have no right to be successful or have someone provided as a surrogate.

These rights would have to be created before gay people can avail of them.

road_high · 18-05-2015 08:10PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Are you really going to claim you wanted to have homosexual sex at five years of age?
I can believe curiosity at that age. I don't believe you wanted to have sex at 5 years of age.

I don't think the op said they wanted to have sex at 5?

Bannasidhe · 18-05-2015 08:10PM

Cruz Hot Trapdoor wrote: »

It would be weird. Inform any six year old about the referendum and watch their nose scrunch up.

Any 6 year old?

My will be 6 next week grandson mentioned it to me, asked it I was going to marry my OH and asked could he wear a suit like Matt Smiths Dr if I do. The only nose scrunching was at the suggestion he might wear a tie rather than a dickie bow.

Not a NSA agent · 18-05-2015 08:11PM

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

There is a book called Tabby McTat, by Julia Donaldson (Gruffalo author), has been one of my child's favourite books since he was about 3 and we have read it 1000 times. It's about a cat who goes to live with 2 women, Prunella and Pat. The book does not elude to what their relationship is, but I think they are a couple. My son asked me once if Pat was Prunella's mum. I said "I think she is her wife, sometimes girls marry girls and boys marry boys". The whole issue was normalised just like that.

I listened to Jim Walsh and Breda O'Brien rant on during The Last Word on Today FM about how normalising LGBT relationships in schools is 'sexualising children'. Can you explain to me how the above equates to sexualising my child, or even what could possibly be considered wrong with it?

They appear to think that they would be shown hardcore gay porn. Most people would just say as you did and that would be the end of it. I'm a bit worried about what they teach their children about heterosexual relationships.

RobertKK · 18-05-2015 08:11PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

I can't imagine what it must be like to have such darkness and filth on the mind. Its just too sad to even imagine. What a horrible world you must see this as.

Oh please....

Shrap wrote: »

Interestingly, it was your suggestion that a child of 5 would be thinking about sex that led to the suggestion that your comment was prurient. Which it was.

It was not my suggestion, it was the the comment about being a criminal at 5 years of age because one is homosexual, which was incorrect before homosexual acts was decriminalised.
Prurience is not a word I use, so will thank marienbad for that, I googled the word, and it said lustful, desires, so adding the word unsavoury to it and given what was being discussed...

There is nothing to more to add.

Bannasidhe · 18-05-2015 08:12PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

You can hand back your lesbian vagina at your local gay bathouse. Replacement straight parts expected in two to three weeks.

They'll nevurrrr take my vajajaaaaaay laddie!

Wrongway1985 · 18-05-2015 08:12PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Jan O' Sullivan was saying today it would be wrong to have a book for a child in school that displayed same sex relationships, as in having a fairytale story with a King and a king...she on the Yes side.

This book?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_%26_King

gandalf · 18-05-2015 08:12PM

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I listened to Jim Walsh and Breda O'Brien rant on during The Last Word on Today FM about how normalising LGBT relationships in schools is 'sexualising children'. Can you explain to me how the above equates to sexualising my child, or even what could possibly be considered wrong with it?

Hmmm I think they are mistaken. Where were people like Breda O'Brien and Jim Walsh when Priests were raping kids and being protected afterwards by the church. Those type of people were very quiet than eh :rolleyes:

paulheu · 18-05-2015 08:12PM

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I think you misinterpreted Dr Jimbob, he's definately on the same side as you, and that comment was a sarcastic response

Well that it's all good I guess.. Thing is these threads are kind of spin so think it's easy to miss these things..

paulheu · 18-05-2015 08:13PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

No idea why you put that as a response to my post, but I completely agree with it :pac:

Well, I misread your opinion and then added to it I guess..:D

Bannasidhe · 18-05-2015 08:13PM

Shrap wrote: »

Me too. Am I going to get lesbian parts in the replacement post? :pac:

Try and get one from an Iona donor - I hear they are practically unused.

Ironé · 18-05-2015 08:15PM

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

There is a book called Tabby McTat, by Julia Donaldson (Gruffalo author), has been one of my child's favourite books since he was about 3 and we have read it 1000 times. It's about a cat who goes to live with 2 women, Prunella and Pat. The book does not elude to what their relationship is, but I think they are a couple. My son asked me once if Pat was Prunella's mum. I said "I think she is her wife, sometimes girls marry girls and boys marry boys". The whole issue was normalised just like that.

I listened to Jim Walsh and Breda O'Brien rant on during The Last Word on Today FM about how normalising LGBT relationships in schools is 'sexualising children'. Can you explain to me how the above equates to sexualising my child, or even what could possibly be considered wrong with it?

I must get that book. It's the same as the where do babies come from conversation. There is an age appropriate way to explain these things. I want my kids to grow up not having hang ups with their sexuality. I have a very close gay friend, and he is in the house a good bit with his boyfriend. My kids know that's normal and my eldest, who is 5, knows that they are together. You'd be surprised t how cool kids are with this sort of thing.

RobertKK · 18-05-2015 08:15PM

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

This book?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_%26_King

Yes.

Shrap · 18-05-2015 08:15PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Try and get one from an Iona donor - I hear they are practically unused.

Practically unheard of I'd say. Box unopened

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

Comments