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

Bridge93 · 19-05-2015 10:45AM

I saw Breda O Briens Indo interview from April and properly laughed. She wants gays to abstain from sex before marriage just like hetero couples but then wants to deny them the right to marry?
She is as conservative and homophobic and manipulative as anyone involved in this all referendum and constantly plays the victim.

Vivisectus · 19-05-2015 10:46AM

RobertKK wrote: »

A not guilty verdict would have been better for Yes, given the week that is in it. It tells people here, they can look at the North and see how the religious beliefs of a person are not allowed to be expressed.

They were already using this as an example of the terrible oppression meted out on the poor persecuted majority.

Amazing - backed by the most wealthy international lobby group on the planet, who have branch offices all over Ireland, own the schools we pay for with government money, and with a dedicated staff of thousands of preachers... and they are still apparently oppressed as hell. Because they would have to bake a cake.

dvdman1 · 19-05-2015 10:47AM

Akrasia wrote: »

So you're worried that allowing gay marriage could somehow turn your kids gay?

That's such an ignorant position to take. I pity your children.

Your kids will be straight or gay regardless of the outcome of this referendum. I can only hope that you accept them for who they are. If one or more of them does turn out to be gay, you can do so much needless harm by the attitudes you are expressing on this thread.

i accept difference, id never lie to a child and tell them a fairy tale that were all the same,
we deserve to be treated equal but were NOT the SAME,we need to learn tolerance

aloyisious · 19-05-2015 10:48AM

To Elland Back wrote: »

Is there anyone as concerned as me that there are a vast number of young people who won't be voting this Friday because they are away from their registered polling station because of college or work? Also, because of the disenchantment many young people have in our politicians, they just never registered.

I believe the vast majority of people will want this referendum passed, but will the required numbers cast a vote? I'm genuinely worried.

This has probably been answered by some-one else by now. Students living away from home, in full-time education, are entitled to cast their vote by post. This quote is from Para 01 of the linked document..

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.glen.ie%2Fattachments%2FA_Guide_to_the_Supplementary_Register_of_Electors.pdf&ei=8QVbVc-JMsbR7QafsoDIDA&usg=AFQjCNH3D_pNSFGW-YVSupdJJ8Kd0nt4Fw&sig2=Y_SI0jj0e0pZgBgrbXvnvg

SafeSurfer · 19-05-2015 10:48AM

VinLieger wrote: »

The supreme court ruled a referndum was required to make it as iron clad as possible and avoid any future legal action by Iona et al which would have definitely happened if the change was made through legislation

The supreme court ruled a referendum was required?

That is just a bare faced lie.

"The salient question, then, is whether the Oireachtas can, conversely, extend marriage rights to a group historically excluded from that institution. This is quite a different question to whether or not, as considered in the Zappone case, same-sex couples enjoy a constitutional right to marry which overrides the legislation in force. Thus, the intermediate possibility is that the constitution neither forces the state to provide for same-sex marriage nor prohibits it from doing so, leaving this decision within the remit of the Oireachtas."

From Humanrights.ie

SireOfSeth · 19-05-2015 10:49AM

dvdman1 wrote: »

I refer to biological nature, anus is designed for fecal material and deification FACT, if you go against nature expect to pay the consequences increased disease etc

Do you mean to say that you don't believe animals (other than humans) perform homosexual acts?

Also, how do you know the anus wasn't designed for homosexual acts? Was the mouth or hand also not designed for sexual acts, or were they only designed for bananas?

Lyaiera · 19-05-2015 10:50AM

dvdman1 wrote: »

I refer to biological nature, anus is designed for fecal material and deification FACT, if you go against nature expect to pay the consequences increased disease etc

We weren't 'designed' for anything.

traprunner · 19-05-2015 10:50AM

dvdman1 wrote: »

I refer to biological nature, anus is designed for fecal material and deification FACT, if you go against nature expect to pay the consequences increased disease etc

Glad someone has finally discovered the meaning of life!!! Although m/f couples do it too! Or is it only an issue with you when two men do it? What about f/f couples?

dvdman1 wrote: »

if you go against nature expect to pay the consequences increased disease etc

So we went against nature to create antibiotics that cure illness....that increased disease??

http://img.picturequotes.com/2/3/2166/what-you-talkin-bout-willis-quote-1.jpg

kunst nugget · 19-05-2015 10:52AM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

The supreme court ruled a referendum was required?

That is just a bare faced lie.

"The salient question, then, is whether the Oireachtas can, conversely, extend marriage rights to a group historically excluded from that institution. This is quite a different question to whether or not, as considered in the Zappone case, same-sex couples enjoy a constitutional right to marry which overrides the legislation in force. Thus, the intermediate possibility is that the constitution neither forces the state to provide for same-sex marriage nor prohibits it from doing so, leaving this decision within the remit of the Oireachtas."

From Humanrights.ie

But only a referendum can provide constitutional protection to same sex marriage. We could legislate for gay marriage but we could just as easily legislate to remove it again.

El Weirdo · 19-05-2015 10:52AM

dvdman1 wrote: »

I refer to biological nature, anus is designed for fecal material and deification FACT...

That's some hole you must have for yourself.

bjork · 19-05-2015 10:53AM

SireOfSeth wrote: »

But you will force them NOT to be allowed to marry someone of the same sex. That sort of bigoted opinion does not belong in a modern Ireland.

I'm not forcing them to do anything

Why the desperation get married? What is it exactly that is so appealing about marriage that a civil partnership or other laws don't cover?

Who are you to say what belongs in "modern Ireland"? I thought diversity was the name of the game? Diversity >>once we all agree with you?

Lyaiera · 19-05-2015 10:53AM

El Weirdo wrote: »

That's some hole you must have for yourself.

It died on the cross for our sins.

El Weirdo · 19-05-2015 10:54AM

bjork wrote: »

Why the desperation get married? What is it exactly that is so appealing about marriage that a civil partnership or other laws don't cover?

Have you read any of this thread?

aloyisious · 19-05-2015 10:56AM

walkingshadow wrote: »

Is there a yes supporter on for balance?

Yup, Leo Varadkar. The show was run on a presentation basis, each person given a short time. There was no studio debate as they were not face to face, only one at a time in the small studio. I thought it was funny-peculiar as most of the interviews I've seen have mostly included "yes, you did" "no, I didn't" sessions, with me joining in at home f-ing and calling out Ronan etc on their lies.

Sofiztikated · 19-05-2015 10:57AM

dvdman1 wrote: »

id rather the seed wasn't planted in my childs mind, i see it as encouraging this type of life decision ..monkey see monkey do

The GREAT thing about nature it doesn't LIE no matter what laws and words we want to use to justify our selfishness

No, nature doesn't lie, and nature doesn't give a damn about laws or words. These are human constructions. As is marriage. And no, it doesn't care what reasons you want to use to justify your selfishness.

dvdman1 wrote: »

I refer to biological nature, anus is designed for fecal material and deification FACT, if you go against nature expect to pay the consequences increased disease etc

As opposed to what kind of nature? Artificial nature?

Hammer Archer · 19-05-2015 10:57AM

bjork wrote: »

I'm not forcing them to do anything

Why the desperation get married? What is it exactly that is so appealing about marriage that a civil partnership or other laws don't cover?

Who are you to say what belongs in "modern Ireland"? I thought diversity was the name of the game? Diversity >>once we all agree with you?

Anyone else feel like they're going around a massive roundabout and no matter how much you try, you just keep going round and round?

traprunner · 19-05-2015 10:58AM

El Weirdo wrote: »

Have you read any of this thread?

Nah...was too busy trying to cancel the gig that her manager booked in The George.

jobbridge4life · 19-05-2015 10:58AM

bjork wrote: »

I'm not forcing them to do anything

Why the desperation get married? What is it exactly that is so appealing about marriage that a civil partnership or other laws don't cover?

Who are you to say what belongs in "modern Ireland"? I thought diversity was the name of the game? Diversity >>once we all agree with you?

Bjork no one is asking you to agree with gay marriage no more than they ask you to agree to anyone's marriage but your own. It is about what the State codifies as its secular law and whether that should include arbitrary discrimination. Don't worry you will be just as free to be as hateful as ever once the referendum passes.

BlitzKrieg · 19-05-2015 10:58AM

My sister's big long message on the issue

Next weekend I'm heading home to mammy's house for two big events. Most importantly I think we can all agree is Eurovision! Any one in or near Thurles on Saturday the 23rd is welcome to come watch at our house. PM or message for address if you need it, don't need to rsvp but a heads up is handy to know how many snacks and drinks to get in. (And here's a doodle of last years winner the amazing Conchita)
The other event is of course the referendum on marriage equality (and the referendum on lowering the age to run for president but lets be honest most aren't even aware that one is happening). I know I've been pretty vocal about the referendum for several months now online but I feel I've not been able to do nearly enough given distance and other road bumps I've had the last few months and I also feel I made a vital mistake in my promotion of a yes in not addressing more directly my reasons for voting yes and in that hopefully help some family and friends reading this will consider the importance of their vote and the impact it can make on our country.
Why am I voting Yes? For one reason – it's the right thing to do. No one has given me a legitimate reason why a yes result will be a negative thing for the country. I've heard lots of bull**** reasons. People who are voting no because Edna Kenny is backing a yes vote and they hate him and his government. People voting no because their religion tells them it's wrong. People voting no because they have some idealised view of what the word 'family' means. If you fall into one of these groups I'm asking you to genuinely look at your reasons and ask yourself if that's a good enough reason. I would actually say the same to some on the Yes side, if they are only voting yes as they think it's giving a finger to the Catholic Church and the likes of the Iona Institute. This isn't, or at least shouldn't be, about religion, or children or what a family is or isn't or even about love...it's about the laws of the country treating all her citizens the same.
If your someone planning to vote no or are not yet decided I want you to do something with me. I want you to think of ten people among your family and/or close friends who are married or have been married. I want you to you think about each one of them and their marriages. Now I want you to compare their marriages to each other and honestly answer are they all the same? I'm betting they are not. I'm betting all the relationships around you are very similar to the ones around me. I look at my family and I see people who are married, I see people who are single parents, I see widowers, I see people who divorced, I see people on second and some even on third marriages, I see married people with kids and those without. I see people who married because they were pregnant and forced into it by family, I see people who are divorced, I see some who had their marriages annulled, I see people who got married young, I see people who got married in their 60s. I see people who had several partners before marrying and I see ones who waited until after marriage before ever having sex (one who waited until he was 40) I see family members who never married and are not likely to ever. I people who are married who will never have children, some by choice, some due to circumstances. I see people who did the full fairytale church wedding, I see ones who got married in a field in the rain and I see people who were together years with several kids before finally getting married.
My family and friends are not unusually. They are the same as thousands of others all around the country. Ireland is made up of relationships of all shapes and sizes and make ups and some of those happen to be same sex relationships and they are no different then the others and they should be treated, by the state, the same as all the others. Some of those relationships may last decades and some won't but they should be given the chance to try just like everyone else. This referendum isn't asking or making your church recognise these relationships the same way the divorcee referendum hasn't forced the church to allow divorcees to remarry in the church. This referendum shouldn't be about religion, or children or even about love, it's about how the state treats it's citizens, that's it and we should all be treated the same.

http://ztoical.tumblr.com/

jobbridge4life · 19-05-2015 10:58AM

traprunner wrote: »

Nah...was too busy trying to cancel the gig that her manager booked in The George.

I would die for that gig.

osarusan · 19-05-2015 11:00AM

bjork wrote: »

What is it exactly that is so appealing about marriage that a civil partnership or other laws don't cover?

Why don't you do some research on that and get back to us?

molloyjh · 19-05-2015 11:01AM

dvdman1 wrote: »

id rather the seed wasn't planted in my childs mind, i see it as encouraging this type of life decision ..monkey see monkey do

The GREAT thing about nature it doesn't LIE no matter what laws and words we want to use to justify our selfishness

So if you tell a child about the gays then they'll become gay?

Wow. Just, wow. That's a level of ignorance and stupidity I thought we had all moved on from.

You're right, nature doesn't lie. So if someone is gay then they'll be gay and if they aren't then they won't be.

SireOfSeth · 19-05-2015 11:01AM

bjork wrote: »

I'm not forcing them to do anything

I didn't say you were. However, obviously, you are happy to allow the discrimination to continue.

Who are you to say what belongs in "modern Ireland"? I thought diversity was the name of the game? Diversity >>once we all agree with you?

Bigotry should not be tolerated. Do you disagree with that?

jooksavage · 19-05-2015 11:03AM

I don't think the Yes side need to be overly concerned with the fringe views of people like dvdman1. The bigger concern is getting apathetic people to go out and vote. My girlfriend is travelling from Kilkenny to Mayo in order to vote. She wouldn't be able to do it if she was working that day. A LOT of young people like her have neglected to register in their current location and I'd be concerned their turnout on the day mightn't reflect their opinion.

molloyjh · 19-05-2015 11:04AM

RobertKK wrote: »

A not guilty verdict would have been better for Yes, given the week that is in it. It tells people here, they can look at the North and see how the religious beliefs of a person are not allowed to be expressed.

If I set up a religion tomorrow that contained in it the belief that anyone named Robert should be prevented from appearing in public should I be allowed to stand at your door and refuse to let you leave your home?

Of course not, because religious beliefs do not trump the law.

K4t · 19-05-2015 11:04AM

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

By expressing religious beliefs you mean discriminating against minorities.

What about a persons right to freedom of religion? Are we free to discriminate against Christians?

Nobody was discriminated against. This case was never about discrimination to anyone looking at it rationally and objectively, which one would have hoped a court of law would have been capable of doing. The bakery is innocent not because of the argument that they were going against their religious belief by making the cake, but that they were going against their beliefs full stop.

molloyjh · 19-05-2015 11:05AM

bjork wrote: »

Every person has the option to marry a person of the opposite sex.

If they don't want to, I'm not going to force them to

No instead you're going to force them NOT to marry the person they love. That's real good of you....

aloyisious · 19-05-2015 11:08AM

Anita Blow wrote: »

Claire Byrne Live showing 72% of those who intend on voting will be voting Yes.

Very promising, but why is there such differences between the opinion polls?

Probably the way the questions are worded, sometimes ensuring you get the answers you wanted.

A UK TV show had a skit on polling, something on the lines of whether it would be better to put young men who'd committed minor crime into prison where they would be locked up with other criminals doing nothing all day, or put them in the army where they'd learn discipline and how to be part of society. It mostly ended up with a YES for the army. Then the pollster revealed that the army would only keep the young men on for 5 years and then release a highly trained fit young killer back on the streets unemployed with no other skills, where-as the criminal would be behind bars keeping the public out of harms way from him.

Akrasia · 19-05-2015 11:09AM

dvdman1 wrote: »

i accept difference, id never lie to a child and tell them a fairy tale that were all the same,
we deserve to be treated equal but were NOT the SAME,we need to learn tolerance

Equality does not mean that everyone is the same, it means that no groups are inherently better or worse than others.

People are different, but have equal status before the law.

The only way you can argue against this, is if you believe that certain groups ought to be legally inferior to others.

frostyjacks · 19-05-2015 11:10AM

Je suis Ashers

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

Comments