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

_Redzer_ · 19-05-2015 02:58PM

If this referendum passes, what the fúck will Iona have left to do?

I can't said to see the shower of cúnts writhing on the floor following the result

BonsaiKitten · 19-05-2015 02:59PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Are pro-lifers a recognised minority group now?

You got that while I was editing.

No, they are not, I'm sure they'd try to claim to be.

If a gay man came in and asked for a wedding cake, but was refused - I'd support him then. However, if it's a cake with a political slogan on it (and gay marriage is very much a political issue at the moment) then I think the bakers should be able to refuse.

molloyjh · 19-05-2015 02:59PM

MessiHutz wrote: »

They are individuals standing by their religious beliefs which they should be entitled to do. It's not discrimination. If they knew that the people ordering say a birthday cake were gay and refused to serve them that would be discrimination. They wanted a gay marriage cake which we are allowed to disagree with, as seen by the referendum down here.

I want my freedom to deny other people their freedom. WHAT ABOUT MY FREEDOM TO DENY YOUR FREEDOM!?

traprunner · 19-05-2015 02:59PM

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

They were asked to make a cake with a pro-gay marriage slogan, not a wedding cake.
A Bert and Ernie cake with a slogan saying support gay marriage, specifically.

Let's say I own a bakery, and some people come in and want me to bake a cake with a pro-life message. As a pro-choicer I wouldn't want to. Should I be able to refuse it? Because while it mightn't fall under discrimination laws, thinking about how uncomfortable I'd be making that cake helps me understand how the bakery felt.

I do think this verdict will push some people towards a No vote. Wrongly, but it might. And I'm a yes voter btw.

You could have the last laugh and make money of them. Cakes with slogans like that are only going to be seen by supporters of the occasion and not the general public.

SireOfSeth · 19-05-2015 03:00PM

MessiHutz wrote: »

Sorry replies are coming very fast! I don't know what religion supports gay marriage but if yours does vote yes on religious grounds if you wish, but people should also be entitled to vote no on religious grounds as well as say no to supporting a cause on religious grounds.

We are voting on civil marriage, not the religious ceremony. You religious freedoms will not be impacted.

frostyjacks · 19-05-2015 03:00PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I for one think he should.

I find it funny that you're very defensive of this baker's freedom, but when it comes to someone's freedom to marry someone they love...

I guess I want to have my cake and eat it.

BonsaiKitten · 19-05-2015 03:00PM

osarusan wrote: »

In Ireland I think you would, as political opinion is not protected under discrimination laws.

It is under Northern Irish law.

I'm picking that issue because it's one where I would refuse to make it, personally. But it helps me understand how the bakery would not have wanted to make something with a slogan they didn't agree with.

MessiHutz · 19-05-2015 03:01PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Why? You're not voting on changing the rules of your religion, you're voting on changing those of the state.

Voting Yes would go against people religious beliefs though. I'm not voting no on those grounds though because I'm not against homosexuality I'm just worried that people are being bullied into going against their religious beliefs which is not right at all and I think a No vote would halt that.

BonsaiKitten · 19-05-2015 03:01PM

traprunner wrote: »

You could have the last laugh and make money of them. Cakes with slogans like that are only going to be seen by supporters of the occasion and not the general public.

This is a great answer in fairness

I still don't think I would, but I like the way you think!

molloyjh · 19-05-2015 03:04PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Should the baker not have the freedom to not bake a cake if he so chooses?

Not if by doing so he/she is being discriminatory. Would you be okay with a baker refusing to bake cakes for women because they didn't want to?

Colonialboy · 19-05-2015 03:04PM

Anybody care to guess what will be the YES/NO county breakdown.
Im guessing that we could have 20 counties voting NO and 6 counties voting YES, but it will be carried by majority.

Similar thing happened with divorce, only 1 county voted for it, Dublin, the rest of the country voted against it, but it was carried by majority.

gandalf · 19-05-2015 03:04PM

MessiHutz wrote: »

Sorry replies are coming very fast! I don't know what religion supports gay marriage but if yours does vote yes on religious grounds if you wish, but people should also be entitled to vote no on religious grounds as well as say no to supporting a cause on religious grounds.

TBH Messi you seem to be making your decision to vote no based on your religious conviction. I would put it to you that you had already decided to vote no before the court case decision today. You are in reality jumping on the bandwagon and lying stating that it is the epiphany of your no vote decision. If that's the case you have just lied which is also against your religion.

traprunner · 19-05-2015 03:04PM

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

This is a great answer in fairness

I still don't think I would, but I like the way you think!

I would only I'm not a very good baker but I could probably kill a few people off with food poisoning

Bannasidhe · 19-05-2015 03:05PM

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

You got that while I was editing.

No, they are not, I'm sure they'd try to claim to be.

If a gay man came in and asked for a wedding cake, but was refused - I'd support him then. However, if it's a cake with a political slogan on it (and gay marriage is very much a political issue at the moment) then I think the bakers should be able to refuse.

Well, the ruling was that they are a for profit business and therefore cannot refuse a customer because what they want conflicts with your religion.
Can you imagine the outrage if a Baptist baker refused to do a 'Catholic' Christening cake because their religion doesn't agree with baptising children?

SireOfSeth · 19-05-2015 03:05PM

MessiHutz wrote: »

Voting Yes would go against people religious beliefs though. I'm not voting no on those grounds though because I'm not against homosexuality I'm just worried that people are being bullied into going against their religious beliefs which is not right at all and I think a No vote would halt that.

No it wouldn't. If those people married a person of the same sex, THAT would go against their religious beliefs. Voting Yes on a civil matter cannot go against anyone's religious beliefs.

molloyjh · 19-05-2015 03:05PM

MessiHutz wrote: »

Well obviously the point I'm making is that they shouldn't have been.

So people should be allowed to behave as they please all they want then as long as it's under a religious banner?

In that case I want a slave. It's in the Bible that I'm allowed one. And nobody can stop me. It's my religious right.

Not a NSA agent · 19-05-2015 03:06PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Should the baker not have the freedom to not bake a cake if he so chooses?

He should, but he should also follow the law and not get a free pass to act however he wants because of his religion. Anti discrimination laws exist to prevent people from restricting others freedom.

Should a person not have the freedom to marry someone of the same gender?

BonsaiKitten · 19-05-2015 03:06PM

On another note, the No campaigners are all over Grafton Street today. I wasn't expecting to run into them trying to get to the bus!

One lad came up to me and tried to give me a flyer but was being really cagey about who he was with. I had to ask him "which side does it support?" about four times before he admitted it was a No campaign flyer. Kept saying "it gives a fair overview of the referendum, no spin, no lies"...

Then he got very upset when I told him he could have not wasted time for both of us and I wouldn't take the leaflet with me...ah well.

molloyjh · 19-05-2015 03:07PM

MessiHutz wrote: »

Voting Yes would go against people religious beliefs though. I'm not voting no on those grounds though because I'm not against homosexuality I'm just worried that people are being bullied into going against their religious beliefs which is not right at all and I think a No vote would halt that.

I'm so sick of the people who want to deny others equality trying to paint themselves as victims in all of this. It's pretty disgusting tbh.

Dimithy · 19-05-2015 03:07PM

MessiHutz wrote: »

Voting Yes would go against people religious beliefs though. I'm not voting no on those grounds though because I'm not against homosexuality I'm just worried that people are being bullied into going against their religious beliefs which is not right at all and I think a No vote would halt that.

There are already many perfectly legal things that go against peoples religious beliefs, are people being bullied to go against their religious beliefs by allowing say pre marital sex?

BonsaiKitten · 19-05-2015 03:08PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Well, the ruling was that they are a for profit business and therefore cannot refuse a customer because what they want conflicts with your religion.
Can you imagine the outrage if a Baptist baker refused to do a 'Catholic' Christening cake because their religion doesn't agree with baptising children?

I wouldn't have a problem with them doing that either.
Wouldn't agree with it, mind, but I don't have a problem with it.

Anita Blow · 19-05-2015 03:08PM

Am I reading this right?
Someone is claiming they're voting no because of a legal case in an entirely different jurisdiction? And they're suggesting that they're doing so because allowing SSM here would lead to the same outcome, even though the jurisdiction in question doesn't allow SSM and so proves that the status of SSM is irrelevant to such cases being brought forward?
In that case I think everyone should vote yes because Uganda recently published a bill allowing for the execution of homosexuals and I'm afraid if we get a No vote that we'll start executing homosexuals here.

It's just baffling that people advocating a No are entirely incapable of debating the actual issue.

freshpopcorn · 19-05-2015 03:08PM

I'm voting No know because,
Leo coming out was a stunt.
The No posters being torn down made me decide to vote no.
Children are going to robbed of a mothers love.
Religious freedom will no longer exists.
Children won't be taught how to live there lives by the bible in school.
We are voting for sodomy.
As a teacher I will have to teach the law of the land and that same sex relationships are equal.
Where is this yes side getting a there money.
Somebody on TV said they were voting no and there were talked down.
There's a gay agenda, the TV is full of gay men reading the news, the rose of Tree, the Eurovision and the GAA.
Churches will be forced to marry two men or two women.
What will be Next will people want to marry there dogs or cat.
Marriage is between a man and woman.

ProfessorPlum · 19-05-2015 03:10PM

MessiHutz wrote: »

Sorry replies are coming very fast! I don't know what religion supports gay marriage but if yours does vote yes on religious grounds if you wish, but people should also be entitled to vote no on religious grounds as well as say no to supporting a cause on religious grounds.

The Quakers and the Unitarian church support SSM. But there are only about 10 of them. So by voting No, you are denying them their right to religious freedom. Is this right?

BonsaiKitten · 19-05-2015 03:10PM

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I'm voting No know because,
Leo coming out was a stunt.
The No posters being torn down made me decide to vote no.
Children are going to robbed of a mothers love.
Religious freedom will no longer exists.
Children won't be taught how to live there lives by the bible in school.
We are voting for sodomy.
As a teacher I will have to teach the law of the land and that same sex relationships are equal.
Where is this yes side getting a there money.
Somebody on TV said they were voting no and there were talked down.
There's a gay agenda, the TV is full of gay men reading the news, the rose of Tree, the Eurovision and the GAA.
Churches will be forced to marry two men or two women.
What will be Next will people want to marry there dogs or cat.
Marriage is between a man and woman.

You forgot "if we legalise this what's next? Incest? Polygamy?!"

thegreatescape · 19-05-2015 03:11PM

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I'm voting No know because,
Leo coming out was a stunt.
The No posters being torn down made me decide to vote no.
Children are going to robbed of a mothers love.
Religious freedom will no longer exists.
Children won't be taught how to live there lives by the bible in school.
We are voting for sodomy.
As a teacher I will have to teach the law of the land and that same sex relationships are equal.
Where is this yes side getting a there money.
Somebody on TV said they were voting no and there were talked down.
There's a gay agenda, the TV is full of gay men reading the news, the rose of Tree, the Eurovision and the GAA.
Churches will be forced to marry two men or two women.
What will be Next will people want to marry there dogs or cat.
Marriage is between a man and woman.

I'm not sure if you're joking or?

frostyjacks · 19-05-2015 03:11PM

molloyjh wrote: »

Not if by doing so he/she is being discriminatory. Would you be okay with a baker refusing to bake cakes for women because they didn't want to?

If the cakes had images of bakers being fed to the lions, I'd understand the objection. What sort of love would be going into that cake anyway, if the baker was only doing it under duress? You can taste the difference.

Bannasidhe · 19-05-2015 03:11PM

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

I wouldn't have a problem with them doing that either.
Wouldn't agree with it, mind, but I don't have a problem with it.

Me neither to be honest but the law has a serious problem with it and 'against my religious beliefs' is not a free pass to choose which laws you will follow and which you can ignore.

MessiHutz · 19-05-2015 03:12PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

How would it go against anyone's religious beliefs? No change would happen to any religion because of this. What you seem to want is one religion's rules to be enshrined in state law. Feck that.

I'm not saying that at all, that's already the case anyway and I'm all for ending that. I'm just saying people are being forced to support something that is against their religion whether it be from the law as seen today up north or through the bullying that we see down here.

mrsoundie · 19-05-2015 03:12PM

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I'm voting No know because,
Leo coming out was a stunt.
The No posters being torn down made me decide to vote no.
Children are going to robbed of a mothers love.
Religious freedom will no longer exists.
Children won't be taught how to live there lives by the bible in school.
We are voting for sodomy.
As a teacher I will have to teach the law of the land and that same sex relationships are equal.
Where is this yes side getting a there money.
Somebody on TV said they were voting no and there were talked down.
There's a gay agenda, the TV is full of gay men reading the news, the rose of Tree, the Eurovision and the GAA.
Churches will be forced to marry two men or two women.
What will be Next will people want to marry there dogs or cat.
Marriage is between a man and woman.

You're funny.

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

Comments