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
Hi all, we have some important news to share. Please follow the link here to find out more!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058419143/important-news/p1?new=1

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

1183184186188189327

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,767 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    HIB wrote: »
    Why? Because we're on boards.ie killing time with half a dozen other unemployed/bored/curious people.

    Jesus. I only made a comment like!!!

    If you want to talk about gay adoption then do so in the appropriate thread. A thread about marriage equality is not the place for it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 889 ✭✭✭opiniated


    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    To be honest, fúck their religion. I'm not religious, so just because your faith has a problem with it, why should I have to conform to your beliefs?

    This has nothing to do with religion, this is a civil issue, the churches aren't being forced to do anything, so it sickens my guts that they're campaigning so hard for a no. Horrible busybodies, and high time they get told to fúck off into their place and out of other people's lives!

    I'm not particularly religious, but, tbh, your comments sickened me, because you want respect for your beliefs, but you have no problem saying "F*ck their" beliefs
    Akrasia wrote: »
    There's a big difference in perceptions when introducing people.

    'This is my girlfriend - implies short term, not necessarily serious or permanent
    vs
    "This is my Wife - Implies permanent committed relationship
    vs
    'This is my partner - Implies business relationship or similar to boyfriend/girlfriend but more likely to be used by older people.

    While it might not matter to you how you introduce your relationship, it does influence other peoples perception of your relationship whether they know it or not.

    Wife/Husband are protected terms that are the highest level of commitment reserved for married couples.
    Partner is not a protected term, Anyone can use it to describe any kind of relationship, romantic or otherwise.

    I'd regard a partner in those circumstances as being someone with whom you're in a long-term relationship, just like marriage is a long-term relationship. You can no longer regard marriage as a lifetime commitment since divorce is legal. The most you can regard marriage as is a desire to make a lifetime commitment.
    I don't want to win their votes. I want them to vote their conscience, and then have the Yes vote crush theirs, drive them before us and hear the lamentations of their women.

    That's not very tolerant of you, is it?
    Akrasia wrote: »
    Ashers, the bakery who refused to make acake promoting Gay marriage were found guilty of discrimination today.

    Previously there had been inaccurate reports that they would be found not guilty
    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/ashers-bakery-found-guilty-of-discrimination-1.2218032
    You're quite right. While it should be quite easy to do, there is a huge reluctance in specifying what exactly the law will look like afterwards. And the Referendum Commission, in some of their statements, are trying to paper over the cracks - when they should just be saying "we don't know". Kevin Cross might be a good lawyer, but he has no mandate to tell us what the Oireachtas will subsequently enact as legislation.

    I think there's a worry, on the Yes side, that specifying the technical changes will cause an emotional reaction. Because, as the Amendment says "without distinction", the list will have to be gender neutral.

    So, just as a gay man will be prohibited from marrying his sister, presumably a straight man will now be specifically prohibited from marrying his brother - because we'll all be formally generally entitled to marry people of the same sex.

    The lack of candour could well cost them the campaign. Which is an awful pity, as they've raised both individual and international expectations by holding the vote.

    Agreed. There is no appetite in the "Yes" camp for stating the simple truth that no one knows what future legislation can be drafted, but that whatever is enshrined in the Constitution must be adhered to in any future legislation.

    VinLieger wrote: »
    So religious freedoms trump equality and its okay to discriminate but only if its on religious grounds?

    It's not ok to discriminate. Can you not see that the mans freedom of conscience was interfered with, in a Country that supposedly endorses religious freedom? For a cake? That some other bakery would have probably quite happily baked?

    I think the gay couple had a right to have whatever they wanted printed on their cake. But I also think the baker should have had a right to refuse to bake it. A little mutual tolerance would go a long way.
    As the judgement stands, politics and gay rights are more equal than religious freedom. Why is it so difficult to understand that denying people the exercise of their freedom if conscience would make them uneasy?

    Two wrongs will always be two wrongs. The law may say one wrong was right, but don't expect ordinary people to think the same way judges do.

    The argument fails because the bolded above is completely unsubstantiated. There is no right to surrogacy under the Constitution and this referendum cannot change that.

    True. There is no right to surrogacy. However, surrogacy legislation is imminent, and the rights enshrined in the constitution will have to be considered when enacting that legislation, since the constitution trumps legislation in the grand scale of things. People get nervous when they sense they are being told half-truths, particularly in Ireland where it's fair to say that a significant portion of the electorate don't particularly trust politicians.
    HIB wrote: »
    I think peoples main concern here is that they think kids of himosexual couples will suffer from bullying more.
    And they feel its unfair to put a child in that situation.[/,QUOTE]

    My 12 year old asked me the last day how I was going to vote (funny what kids discuss, isn't it?)
    I asked her why, and her reply was "Mum, I'm so glad you and Dad aren't a gay couple, because I have nothing against gays, but the slagging the kids would get at school would be savage.!"

    Now, she has been taught not to discriminate at home, that part I understand. It would appear, however, that her classmates have had no such teaching, so, I think those fears are not entirely groundless.
    Now, it's clearly wrong that that should be the case, but it is also wrong, imo, to deny the possibility of such bullying. BTW, my daughter has been well warned not to engage in such bullying if it ever becomes an issue, to which her response was "I know THAT!"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,651 ✭✭✭circadian


    Just got my fourth Iona Institute leaflet since last Tuesday. That's almost one every day. It's the same leaflet too filled with the same guff.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭Ironé


    opiniated wrote: »
    My 12 year old asked me the last day how I was going to vote (funny what kids discuss, isn't it?)
    I asked her why, and her reply was "Mum, I'm so glad you and Dad aren't a gay couple, because I have nothing against gays, but the slagging the kids would get at school would be savage.!"

    Now, she has been taught not to discriminate at home, that part I understand. It would appear, however, that her classmates have had no such teaching, so, I think those fears are not entirely groundless.
    Now, it's clearly wrong that that should be the case, but it is also wrong, imo, to deny the possibility of such bullying. BTW, my daughter has been well warned not to engage in such bullying if it ever becomes an issue, to which her response was "I know THAT!"

    More reason for us all to Vote Yes and show that same sex couples are normal and equal. And that future generations will grow up without these sort of prejudices.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭LookingFor


    HIB wrote: »
    I think peoples main concern here is that they think kids of himosexual couples will suffer from bullying more.
    And they feel its unfair to put a child in that situation.

    The children are in this situation, already. This isn't a referendum on gay couple's parenting.

    I think they are less likely to be bullied if the state doesn't give license to the idea that their families or less or that the kids shouldn't be proud of their parents, which is the more or less explicit subtext of the no campaign.

    A strong step towards getting rid of this bullying and discrimination is to remove any hint of that discrimination from the opportunities available to all two parent families in the eyes of the state, in terms of legal/constitutional status and protection.

    On the contrary, if this referendum fails, I think there will buoy those who would bully these kids - bullies targeting these kids may have a sense of popular support. This isn't to emotionally blackmail anyone but I think it's a likely unfortunate fact.

    (All that said, I do think the vast majority of people are decent - and from what I've heard, bullying like this is not common).


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,935 ✭✭✭Anita Blow


    opiniated wrote: »

    Now, she has been taught not to discriminate at home, that part I understand. It would appear, however, that her classmates have had no such teaching, so, I think those fears are not entirely groundless.
    Now, it's clearly wrong that that should be the case, but it is also wrong, imo, to deny the possibility of such bullying. BTW, my daughter has been well warned not to engage in such bullying if it ever becomes an issue, to which her response was "I know THAT!"

    Again though, this has nothing to do with the referendum. Gay people have been adopting since the early 90s. Furthermore there's many children of same-sex couples publicly advocating a yes vote who have stated they endured no such bullying.

    If we're going to amend our constitution based on the potential for taunting in the primary school yard we should also ban ginger kids. Would be awful to deliberately bring a child into the world that may be slagged in school for their hair.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭LookingFor


    Anita Blow wrote: »
    Again though, this has nothing to do with the referendum. Gay people have been adopting since the early 90s. Furthermore there's many children of same-sex couples publicly advocating a yes vote who have stated they endured no such bullying.

    If we're going to amend our constitution based on the potential for taunting in the primary school yard we should also ban ginger kids. Would be awful to deliberately bring a child into the world that may be slagged in school for their hair.

    Or black kids, or poor kids or...

    It's a circular argument. You cannot beat bullies by conceding different treatment in the law. You're just feeding that culture.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    You lose.

    and the 'nuns y'see' made it a blanket comment by implying all nuns are the same.

    Nonsense. You throw in links to a few Nuns who are voting yes. Should I bother to put up links for Nuns voting No? No, because it derails the thread.

    I stand by the point I made, (not the point you think I made, or the point you wish I made,) I'd be willing to bet that the Nuns in the post I quoted would vote no to SSM.


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


    Nonsense. You throw in links to a few Nuns who are voting yes. Should I bother to put up links for Nuns voting No? No, because it derails the thread.

    I stand by the point I made, (not the point you think I made, or the point you wish I made,) I'd be willing to bet that the Nuns in the post I quoted would vote no to SSM.

    Nuns y'see... eh.

    You generalised. You were called on it.

    Move on stewie. Let it go.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Nuns y'see... eh.

    You generalised. You were called on it.

    Move on stewie. Let it go.

    You let go first.


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


    You let go first.

    I'm eating me dinner while watching Channel 4 news mate :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I'm eating me dinner while watching Channel 4 news mate :D

    A multi-tasker eh?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,491 ✭✭✭looking_around


    Was waiting at the doc office earlier today, and had the "pleasure" of having a quick chat with a nun.

    She's almost certain Mallow will mostly vote no, where as Cork city will mostly vote yes. Which she was going to go on about the "youth of today" when I quickly said "I'm voting yes".
    Not surprised by her next comment.
    "That's the wrong thing to do and I'll tell you why.." .
    I interrupted her, saying, "it's not my place to tell anyone if it's the wrong thing to do or not. I have no right to force my beliefs on others and I won't."
    She.. "I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone. I'm just explaining why it's the wrong thing to do"

    #face palm#

    edit, I do not post this, to say all nuns are the same by any means or anything. It's just the first time I "spoke" to someone who's voting no.


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


    A multi-tasker eh?

    Yup.

    I can even walk and breathe at the same time.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,408 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Was waiting at the doc office earlier today, and had the "pleasure" of having a quick chat with a nun.

    She's almost certain Mallow will mostly vote no, where as Cork city will mostly vote yes. Which she was going to go on about the "youth of today" when I quickly said "I'm voting yes".
    Not surprised by her next comment.
    "That's the wrong thing to do and I'll tell you why.." .
    I interrupted her, saying, "it's not my place to tell anyone if it's the wrong thing to do or not. I have no right to force my beliefs on others and I won't."
    She.. "I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone. I'm just explaining why it's the wrong thing to do"

    #face palm#

    edit, I do not post this, to say all nuns are the same by any means or anything. It's just the first time I "spoke" to someone who's voting no.


    While I am voting yes she is just telling you why you should vote no. There have been many threads on this forum doing just that. Do you think all discussion should be banned as "it is forcing there beliefs on them" or just beliefs you do not agree with.

    Just wondering why you but the words spoke in commas. Is it different from listening on radio/tv or reading


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,041 ✭✭✭zl1whqvjs75cdy


    Mate of mine was walking home from work through town with yes badges on his bag. He noticed someone was walking very close behind him but didn't take much notice as Dublin is busy in the evenings. Anyway when my mate got home he found that the guy had scribbled out his yes badges and wrote no on them! Great advertising for the no campaign and the type of bigot it attracts.


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


    Was waiting at the doc office earlier today, and had the "pleasure" of having a quick chat with a nun.

    She's almost certain Mallow will mostly vote no, where as Cork city will mostly vote yes. Which she was going to go on about the "youth of today" when I quickly said "I'm voting yes".
    Not surprised by her next comment.
    "That's the wrong thing to do and I'll tell you why.." .
    I interrupted her, saying, "it's not my place to tell anyone if it's the wrong thing to do or not. I have no right to force my beliefs on others and I won't."
    She.. "I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone. I'm just explaining why it's the wrong thing to do"

    #face palm#

    edit, I do not post this, to say all nuns are the same by any means or anything. It's just the first time I "spoke" to someone who's voting no.
    You shouldn't have bullied that nun. This is the kind of behaviour that turns people off the whole yes campaign. Stop bullying nuns.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    K4t wrote: »
    You shouldn't have bullied that nun. This is the kind of behaviour that turns people off the whole yes campaign. Stop bullying nuns.

    LOL you obviously haven't dealt with nuns up close!

    You don't bully nuns, they bully you !!!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72 ✭✭MessiHutz


    Was waiting at the doc office earlier today, and had the "pleasure" of having a quick chat with a nun.

    She's almost certain Mallow will mostly vote no, where as Cork city will mostly vote yes. Which she was going to go on about the "youth of today" when I quickly said "I'm voting yes".
    Not surprised by her next comment.
    "That's the wrong thing to do and I'll tell you why.." .
    I interrupted her, saying, "it's not my place to tell anyone if it's the wrong thing to do or not. I have no right to force my beliefs on others and I won't."
    She.. "I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone. I'm just explaining why it's the wrong thing to do"

    #face palm#

    edit, I do not post this, to say all nuns are the same by any means or anything. It's just the first time I "spoke" to someone who's voting no.

    She wasn't forcing her views by saying it's the wrong to do, unless you are say every single Yes campaigner is forcing their beliefs on others. "It's just the right thing to do" How many times have you heard that from the Yes side?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,491 ✭✭✭looking_around


    MessiHutz wrote: »
    She wasn't forcing her views by saying it's the wrong to do, unless you are say every single Yes campaigner is forcing their beliefs on others. "It's just the right thing to do" How many times have you heard that from the Yes side?

    She was when she was about to use the bible to quote being gay is wrong.

    I believe anyone who votes no, is forcing their views on others.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    Mate of mine was walking home from work through town with yes badges on his bag. He noticed someone was walking very close behind him but didn't take much notice as Dublin is busy in the evenings. Anyway when my mate got home he found that the guy had scribbled out his yes badges and wrote no on them! Great advertising for the no campaign and the type of bigot it attracts.
    In fairness that's quite funny. Creepy, but funny all the same. Also, your friend shouldn't have bullied the guy by walking home from work with yes badges on his bag. Does the yes side no favours.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,526 ✭✭✭Slicemeister


    Had a till operator wearing a Yes Badge today being served in a petrol station. Very unprofessional.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    MessiHutz wrote: »
    She wasn't forcing her views by saying it's the wrong to do, unless you are say every single Yes campaigner is forcing their beliefs on others. "It's just the right thing to do" How many times have you heard that from the Yes side?

    Seriously Messi can you tell me what is about gay people marrying that makes you so mad you felt the need to register so you could post against it here?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72 ✭✭MessiHutz


    I believe anyone who votes no, is forcing their views on others.

    ????
    How does that make sense?


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


    Had a till operator wearing a Yes Badge today being served in a petrol station. Very unprofessional.

    Did they spit in your petrol tank?
    Refuse to give you your change unless you vote yes?
    Demand you arrange for them to get a baby?
    Spray you with glitter?

    Do you maybe think it's up to their employer really?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    MessiHutz wrote: »
    ????
    How does that make sense?

    If you vote yes you are not restricting anyone from marrying who they wish (outside of the existing familial restrictions of course)

    If you vote not you are codifying your vision of marriage and excluding those who may share a different view, even a religiously held view.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72 ✭✭MessiHutz


    Seriously Messi can you tell me what is about gay people marrying that makes you so mad you felt the need to register so you could post against it here?

    Nothing about it makes me mad, as I said I'm not even sure I'll vote No.
    This is the first time I can vote apart from the ****ty council/european elections so I think it's fair enough I registered so I could discuss it? Or would you prefer I kept any views that are different to you to myself?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,651 ✭✭✭circadian


    Had a till operator wearing a Yes Badge today being served in a petrol station. Very unprofessional.

    I have a vote yes poster at my desk at work, is that unprofessional? HR don't seem to think so as long as referendum posters aren't on bulletin boards.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Had a till operator wearing a Yes Badge today being served in a petrol station. Very unprofessional.

    Had a tesco till operator wearing a Yes Badge today. Very professional, very courteous and very heartwarming.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,526 ✭✭✭Slicemeister


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Did they spit in your petrol tank?
    Refuse to give you your change unless you vote yes?
    Demand you arrange for them to get a baby?
    Spray you with glitter?

    Do you maybe think it's up to their employer really?


    So you don't think it's unprofessional to wear it pushing a personal agenda?I know his employer very well but tbh won't mention it, life's too short.

    Best keep his opinions for his private life and the polling booths imo.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement