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

abff · 22-05-2015 08:14AM

haveringchick wrote: »

Should church members be excluded from "society" then? What form should this exclusion take? How would the exclusion be administered?

Nobody said that members of the Catholic church should be excluded from society. The point that was being made was that a religious body should not have a say in the overall running of the state. While the Catholic church was specifically mentioned because of its dominant position in Irish society, this same principle should apply to all religious bodies.

For example, would you be in favour of the introduction of Sharia law in Ireland if the majority of the population was Muslim?

mylefttesticle · 22-05-2015 08:15AM

haveringchick wrote: »

But it's not the Church's fault that the government don't already have a way for everybody to marry whomever they choose.
Today Irish people have the chance to tell the government what they want.
If they don't take the chance or if the answer isn't what you want it to be then that's not the Churches fault.

Homosexuality is treated in Roman Catholic Church teaching under two forms: homosexual orientation is considered an "objective disorder" because Catholicism views it as being "ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil", but not sinful unless acted upon.[1] Homosexual sexual activity, by contrast, is viewed as a "moral disorder"[1] and "homosexual acts" as "contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity."[2]

The Catholic Church teaches that marriage can only be between a man and a woman,[3][4] and opposes introduction of both civil and religious same-sex marriage.[5][6][7][8][9] The Church also holds that same-sex unions are an unfavorable environment for children and that the legalization of such unions is harmful to society.[10]

They can probably share some responsibility with ideologies like this and the influence they have on well lets use your 80% figure.

haveringchick · 22-05-2015 08:15AM

mylefttesticle wrote: »

It would start and end with you being treated for your passive aggressiveness.

Somebody asks you questions you can't answer so you allege passive aggression.

mylefttesticle · 22-05-2015 08:17AM

haveringchick wrote: »

Somebody asks you questions you can't answer so you allege passive aggression.

Indeed.

jamesbere · 22-05-2015 08:18AM

Everybody, make sure to post on Facebook you're voting or else it doesn't count

Merry Prankster · 22-05-2015 08:18AM

Lord Trollington wrote: »

This is probably for another debate but there is no role for the church in society whatsoever.

People can have their beliefs but it should I'm no way overshadow the governance of a nation.

The fact the Catholic Church's opinions are getting so much publicity on all things boils my blood.

I won't even get into the years of abuse and cover ups.

This. Today's Independent has a story about how the gay cake row has given the no side a massive boost.

QUOTE:

"This decision represents a serious blow for free speech," said John Murray, who was speaking on behalf of a group of 100 evangelical church leaders."Since the verdict came in we have had a number of people coming forward who were on the fence to say they are now voting No. They understand that it could end anywhere. It is not just about equality anymore, it is about freedom of speech."

Very rich coming from an institution that has protection from criticism - blasphemy - written in to the constitution. If it were gay proprietors refusing to serve a Christian, I doubt we'd be hearing such vocal support for freedom of speech from him.

This case was very simply about a breach of anti-discrimination laws. His use of it to bolster 'no' support is outrageous.

haveringchick · 22-05-2015 08:20AM

abff wrote: »

Nobody said that members of the Catholc church should be excluded from society. The point that was being made was that a religious body should not have a say in the overall running of the state. While the Catholic church was specifically mentioned because of its dominant position in Irish society, this same principle should apply to all religious bodies.

For example, would you be in favour of the introduction of Sharia law in Ireland if the majority of the population was Muslim?

But the members of the RCC ARE the RCC.
And the RCC have no say in yhe running of 2015 Ireland. They do have a tight to have an opinion though. And to express that opinion.

timetogo · 22-05-2015 08:21AM

Lord Trollington wrote: »

This is probably for another debate but there is no role for the church in society whatsoever.

I'm an atheist and disagree with that. The church should have a role but proportionate to the amount of real believers. Unfortunately a majority of Irish identify as Catholic even if they're not.

However I think this referendum has damaged the church. For myself I was of the opinion that it was benign and irrelevant these days. Over the last few weeks I've seen that it's neither. I used to pay lip service to church services e.g. Christenings and would have considered getting a future child (if any) Christened. Myself and my wife have discussed it and don't want to be associated with the church in any way after listening to the threats and muddying of the waters that the bishops have given out over the last few months.

So for me, if it's Yes or No that's a good outcome. I would imagine a lot of people might be in the same boat.

But yes, that's for another (probably humongous) thread

Sgt Hartman · 22-05-2015 08:24AM

Every time I see someone wearing a "YES EQUALITY" badge I seem to get an air of smug self righteous superiority from them. I'll vote yes but I don't think it's necessary for me to go around smugly advertising this with a badge.

Ave Sodalis · 22-05-2015 08:27AM

haveringchick wrote: »

But the members of the RCC ARE the RCC.
And the RCC have no say in yhe running of 2015 Ireland. They do have a tight to have an opinion though. And to express that opinion.

Oh ffs, there's a difference between what the poster was saying and what you're trying to make out he was saying, and you know it. Quit trying to cause arguments for the sake of argument.

YurOK2 · 22-05-2015 08:30AM

Back from voting already as I'm heading off for the weekend at 11. I hope there will be good news later and celebration of everybody being allowed the freedom to marry who they love.

Ave Sodalis · 22-05-2015 08:30AM

Merry Prankster wrote: »

This. Today's Independent has a story about how the gay cake row has given the no side a massive boost.

QUOTE:

"This decision represents a serious blow for free speech," said John Murray, who was speaking on behalf of a group of 100 evangelical church leaders."Since the verdict came in we have had a number of people coming forward who were on the fence to say they are now voting No. They understand that it could end anywhere. It is not just about equality anymore, it is about freedom of speech."

Very rich coming from an institution that has protection from criticism - blasphemy - written in to the constitution. If it were gay proprietors refusing to serve a Christian, I doubt we'd be hearing such vocal support for freedom of speech from him.

This case was very simply about a breach of anti-discrimination laws. His use of it to bolster 'no' support is outrageous.

Very rich considering Iona have the media under their thumb due to threat of legal action if they so much as dare say anything against the No side, which is why the No side have gotten away with so much during debates. But I mean, free speech!

mylefttesticle · 22-05-2015 08:31AM

Sgt Hartman wrote: »

Every time I see someone wearing a "YES EQUALITY" badge I seem to get an air of smug self righteous superiority from them. I'll vote yes but I don't think it's necessary for me to go around smugly advertising this with a badge.

Maybe they thought you were giving them the eye and they smugly thought ''Yes i still have it''

frostyjacks · 22-05-2015 08:31AM

I wish I had a "Vote for Pedro" badge.

B.A._Baracus · 22-05-2015 08:32AM

yes vote will get in with a land slide.
It is just the type of thing that you will have non-voters turning up to vote and, in my opinion, the yes vote seems much stronger than no.

mylefttesticle · 22-05-2015 08:32AM

haveringchick wrote: »

Do you realise that people outside Dublin can vote too?

Yes but they shouldn't really be allowed too.:pac:

gandalf · 22-05-2015 08:33AM

I'll be voting later as I have a meeting in a few minutes. Really hoping for a historic day tomorrow. Then on Monday it's time to co-ordinate a campaign against the Iona Institute and it's so-called charitable status.

mylefttesticle · 22-05-2015 08:34AM

haveringchick wrote: »

Do you realise that people outside Dublin can vote too?

And on that point i am off now to vote NO!

mylefttesticle · 22-05-2015 08:35AM

To Discrimination that is!:P

_Kaiser_ · 22-05-2015 08:36AM

Lord Trollington wrote: »

What a massive moment in Irish history. So glad to be alive and apart of it.

Time to throw off the shackles of the past and bring about the dawn of a new Ireland.

Get out and vote people.

VOTE YES

Overselling it a bit there now to be honest.. it's hardly the fall of Communism or the Berlin wall, or the end of WWII. It's formalising an issue that most people have no problem with anyway.

It reminds me of a scene in the Simpsons where the local Gay Pride Parade is on and the chants of "we're here, we're queer, get used to it!" Lisa's response is: "You do this every year.. We ARE used to it!"

By all means everyone who has an opinion on this issue (either way!) should get out and make themselves heard today by voting, but the hype over this issue has crossed over into the ridiculous on more than one occasion.

Floppybits wrote: »

Thank Christ this referendum is nearly over. The behaviour of both sides in this debate has been Apalling. The No side making up all kinds of crap and the Yes side just plain old bullying to anyone who might vote no.

For me I think this could have been solved by the government if they had of brought in some sort of civil union legislation that gives gay people and heterosexual people the same rights and privileges as married people. Remember heterosexual people who don't believe in marriage also suffer from same lack of equality as gay people, they don't get the same rights or protection as married couples and fir them to do that they gave to get married.

Agree on both points to be honest.. the attention this has gotten (mostly online really) is a bit much and I for one will be glad when it's over tonight.

This vote is being pushed as a recognition/acceptance of being gay but we already have that. Honestly, do (again) most people even care if their friends or relatives are gay anymore? And that's a GOOD thing right? It SHOULDN'T matter.

Yes I understand it's still a valid issue for many and they should be free to do what they want (before the Yes side start jumping on me!) but as you point out, there are unmarried heterosexual couples out there who don't get the same protections/benefits either - particularly if they're the male side of the couple and kids are involved.

Today's vote will do nothing to address those issues, and those people make up a far bigger percentage of people than same-sex couples who want to tie the knot. Where's the reform to address that?

looksee · 22-05-2015 08:38AM

And don't wear your badge when you go to vote...

SILVAMAN · 22-05-2015 08:39AM

Just voted.
Almost didn't-very mixed emotions as I drove to polling station-from elation that this is hopefully the end of the road of the long fight to be finally treated as an equal among my fellow citizens, to incredible bitterness that I have to depend on others to afford me that right. I cannot help but think of the Declan Flynns of this country, the hundreds who were swept away by AIDS, underground night clubs, others like me who felt compelled to emigrate because to express our love was illegal.
Let's hope a line has finally been drawn under the past.

Zubeneschamali · 22-05-2015 08:41AM

MathDebater wrote: »

Someone who has never set foot in Ireland, but has an Irish born granny and who registers their birth with the FBR is as much an Irish citizen as someone who was born and raised here. How can you legally discriminate against one and not the other?

Other countries in Europe seem to manage OK: "German citizens with permanent residence abroad can participate in federal elections in Germany and European elections. As a rule, German voters who reside permanently in non-EU countries abroad and are not resident in Germany any more, cannot participate in German state and local elections. However, German citizens who are living permanently in other EU countries can vote in municipal elections of their country of residence."

leahyl · 22-05-2015 08:43AM

I headed in to vote before work this morning; hopefully today, on my 30th birthday, this country will make history and allow everyone the freedom and right to marry who they love!

Hermy · 22-05-2015 08:43AM

Sgt Hartman wrote: »

Every time I see someone wearing a "YES EQUALITY" badge I seem to get an air of smug self righteous superiority from them. I'll vote yes but I don't think it's necessary for me to go around smugly advertising this with a badge.

Maybe it's not smugness but barely-contained excitement about what a Yes vote means for Ireland.
I'm not gay so I won't be directly affected by a Yes vote but I'm very excited about what a Yes vote will say about our country - that the days of ignorance and intolerance breed by an overzealous church are behind us.
And for me that is something to smile about.

Vivisectus · 22-05-2015 08:44AM

haveringchick wrote: »

But the members of the RCC ARE the RCC.
And the RCC have no say in yhe running of 2015 Ireland. They do have a tight to have an opinion though. And to express that opinion.

Ermmm... it is just a BIT more complicated than that!

The members of the RCC have no almost say in how the RCC is run. It is an authoritarian and hierarchical organisation that is not exactly well known for it's democratic values.

It is also very hard to define who is a member of the Church and who is not. Loads of people tick the catholic box, but very few of them are actively involved or believe strongly in what the church professes.

Nevertheless the Church runs about 95% of schools... paid for by the state. State-funded teachers can be sacked for being gay.

We have a history where the Church and the state intertwined to an unhealthy degree, with the Church regularly taking over state functions and authority.

Now most of the bad old days are over, fortunately, and because Irish Catholics are the same lovely and essentially decent sort that the rest of the Irish are, it causes far fewer problems than there could be. But that does not mean we should not look at some of these issues and start trying to deal with them.

molloyjh · 22-05-2015 08:44AM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Overselling it a bit there now to be honest.. it's hardly the fall of Communism or the Berlin wall, or the end of WWII. It's formalising an issue that most people have no problem with anyway.

It reminds me of a scene in the Simpsons where the local Gay Pride Parade is on and the chants of "we're here, we're queer, get used to it!" Lisa's response is: "You do this every year.. We ARE used to it!"

By all means everyone who has an opinion on this issue (either way!) should get out and make themselves heard today by voting, but the hype over this issue has crossed over into the ridiculous on more than one occasion.

Agree on both points to be honest.. the attention this has gotten (mostly online really) is a bit much and I for one will be glad when it's over tonight.

This vote is being pushed as a recognition/acceptance of being gay but we already have that. Honestly, do (again) most people even care if their friends or relatives are gay anymore? And that's a GOOD thing right? It SHOULDN'T matter.

Yes I understand it's still a valid issue for many and they should be free to do what they want (before the Yes side start jumping on me!) but as you point out, there are unmarried heterosexual couples out there who don't get the same protections/benefits either - particularly if they're the male side of the couple and kids are involved.

Today's vote will do nothing to address those issues, and those people make up a far bigger percentage of people than same-sex couples who want to tie the knot. Where's the reform to address that?

If they are unmarried it is either by choice or circumstance of their own making. They beat the responsibility for that. It's nothing at all like what we're being asked to vote on today.

Separate issues should be dealt with separately. Let's worry about marriage equality today and we can look at other issues once this has been dealt with.

Merry Prankster · 22-05-2015 08:44AM

Floppybits wrote: »

The behaviour of both sides in this debate has been Apalling. The No side making up all kinds of crap and the Yes side just plain old bullying to anyone who might vote no.

It's very telling that so many 'no' voters claim that they are being 'bullied' and are being made to feel guity, depsite having 'God' and 'natural law' on their side, yet not one 'yes' voter I've spoken to has discussed any feelings of guilt about their stance. How can you be made to feel guilty about something you fully believe in?

Both sides are equally vociferous, yet accusations of bullying have only come from the 'no' side. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Vivisectus · 22-05-2015 08:48AM

leahyl wrote: »

I headed in to vote before work this morning; hopefully today, on my 30th birthday, this country will make history and allow everyone the freedom and right to marry who they love!

Happy Birthday!

MonkeyTennis · 22-05-2015 08:48AM

Its a HUGE day for Ireland. Lots of attention from the International Press. If it passes we will go from that funny little country to a leading light in equal rights.

And yes it is time to get rid of pubs closing on good friday

*sneaked that in there*

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

Comments