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

mrkiscool2 · 22-05-2015 02:00PM

tigger123 wrote: »

If the No side were willing to take a live and live attitude (as you're implying in your post) they wouldn't be voting No. They'd either abstain or vote Yes.

The No side are trying to impose their values on other people, which is wrong.

Robert, your life won't change if a Yes is returned tomorrow, but it will make lots of other people happy.

I'm sorry. I am a massive Yes voter, I've been through this in college on a Students Union, campaigning for this issue. I believe that the vote should be Yes. However, that does not diminish the fact that people have the right to vote whatever way they want. If they can live with their decision to vote no then they have the democratic right to do so. I have not liked the stifling of free speech by the Yes side in this campaign, it has disgusted me if I am being honest.

I desperately want this referendum to be passed and will be gutted if it fails. However, I do not want it to come at the price of freedom of speech and expression. It has to be one with the other, not people being bullied into doing something they don't agree with. Sorry, I hate this sort of attitude.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Yes but if we're all about "equality" today then they shouldn't have to in order to be equal to married couples (welfare, tax, Guardianship etc - here you go). Today referendum does nothing to change that - if anything it marginalises them even more.

But they can get married? Do you not see the difference? They are choosing to remain single, which is a freedom. Unlike LGBT people who don't have the choice to get married.

Kermit.de.frog · 22-05-2015 02:00PM

All these emigrants are coming home to vote when they should not have a vote :mad:

kunst nugget · 22-05-2015 02:00PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Because this has morphed from a legitimate issue to a social (media) experiment where only those voting the "right" way would dare post such popularity contest nonsense.

It's actually depressing how little value is placed in our democratic process that this is going on today - but of course because it means the result will go the way the "hive" has decided that's cool.

I'm in my late thirties. If I go to a pub, I look like an off duty Garda. At this stage of the game I'm as far from cool as can be. This isn't about voting to look 'cool'. I'm voting because I believe gay couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples when it comes to marriage. There's no secret hope that I'll look like I'm down with the kids. Being petulant about why people are voting yes and accusing them of being part of a 'hive' mind is extraordinarily childish.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

People should be free to vote their conscience without fear of ridicule or abuse (and that goes equally for both sides) and the will of the people should be represented by those eligible to vote - not those just home for a day-trip (with questionable/suspect eligibility) to be "progressive" and "cool" on FB

Pretty expensive method to be 'cool'. They could have just bought a couple of Velvet Underground albums.

RobertKK · 22-05-2015 02:00PM

BizzyC wrote: »

It's not just people saying these things though.
The constitution lays it out as a right, but not one that's afforded to same sex couples.

People can have whatever opinion they want, and can lobby for a change in laws all they want, but our constitution should be open and accepting to all people without treating one group of its citizens with a greater degree of legal protection than another.

The constitution doesn't.

It may tomorrow depending on the vote.

Zen65 · 22-05-2015 02:01PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Both sides argued for what they believed, and I think everyone will be relieved it will be over.

"Amen" to that!!

oppenheimer1 · 22-05-2015 02:01PM

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

There are probably some but we have no way of knowing or how they are voting, it could be anything between none and all.

The actual way they are voting is not relevant. Many of these people left during the 2008-2011 exodus.

It's beyond me how anyone can condone the behaviour of these people, let alone celebrate it. While the proposed amendment will have little effect on people that live here, it will have no effect on those that don't. Why should those who have no right to a say in our laws determine what they should be?

galljga1 · 22-05-2015 02:01PM

Vivisectus wrote: »

I can have nothing against dark-haired people, but still feel very strongly that driving cars is something that is only for people with light hair. Unless I can supply a really good, rational reason why this is not unfair, my position is inherently bigoted.

You confuse having your opinion challenged with some sort of ad hominem.

In the main (or mane) I am bald but have dark hair rapidly turning grey. Can I drive?

Not a NSA agent · 22-05-2015 02:02PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

The actual way they are voting is not relevant. Many of these people left during the 2008-2011 exodus.

It's beyond me how anyone can condone the behaviour of these people, let alone celebrate it. While the proposed amendment will have little effect on people that live here, it will have no effect on those that don't. Why should those who have no right to a say in our laws determine what they should be?

How do you know that?

MathDebater · 22-05-2015 02:02PM

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

There are probably some but we have no way of knowing or how they are voting, it could be anything between none and all.

I'm going to lodge a complaint with evidence that at least four people who voted where not resident in the state since Christmas 2011. This isn't about a yes or no vote to me. It's much bigger than that. Talking about it with anonymous posters won't change it and it will occur again unless it's widely reported.

road_high · 22-05-2015 02:04PM

MathDebater wrote: »

I'm going to lodge a complaint with evidence that at least four people who voted where not resident in the state since Christmas 2011. This isn't about a yes or no vote to me. It's much bigger than that. Talking about it with anonymous posters won't change it and it will occur again unless it's widely reported.

How petty and sad...but off ya go

AtomicHorror · 22-05-2015 02:04PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

All these emigrants are coming home to vote when they should not have a vote :mad:

Are you annoyed that they're coming to vote or that they're coming to vote yes?

K4t · 22-05-2015 02:05PM

RobertKK wrote: »

One can argue, each side is trying to impose their values.

Exactly. And while one side values equality, the other does not. Congrats on finally getting it.

galljga1 · 22-05-2015 02:05PM

MathDebater wrote: »

I'm going to lodge a complaint with evidence that at least four people who voted where not resident in the state since Christmas 2011. This isn't about a yes or no vote to me. It's much bigger than that. Talking about it with anonymous posters won't change it and it will occur again unless it's widely reported.

Is it just me or does anyone else think this is a massive over-reaction?

MathDebater · 22-05-2015 02:05PM

road_high wrote: »

How petty and sad...but off ya go

If you think reporting people for committing electoral fraud is petty and sad, then that says a lot more about you than I.

GalwayGunner · 22-05-2015 02:06PM

the_monkey wrote: »

TWADDLE

That was really a struggle to play that video until the end....wackos.

RobertKK · 22-05-2015 02:06PM

mylefttesticle wrote: »

You miss the point! You might not care but many do, i don't mind being a slave so why should anyone else?

PS. **** on both sides, but so what! If you like the idea of equality vote yes, if you don't then vote no. Its that simple.

I have a lot of issues with civil marriage, before one even goes near same sex marriage. I don't have time to air them, but I have posted about it in the past.
I don't see what is great about wanting the state to regulate one's private life and who they love.

the groutch · 22-05-2015 02:06PM

road_high wrote: »

How petty and sad...but off ya go

How is it petty?
It's about respecting the law of the land, something lacking in those who are illegally voting.

_Kaiser_ · 22-05-2015 02:06PM

road_high wrote: »

How petty and sad...but off ya go

Why is it sad? Legitimate question...

Let's (hypothetically) say these 4 people he refers to return home to vote in the GE next year and it's their vote that get SF/FF/<whatever party you don't like> elected.

Is that still ok then, or is it "different" because it's not a populist issue?

tayto lover · 22-05-2015 02:07PM

I was first to vote in my local polling station this morning.
Was there before they opened actually while on my way to work.
So the Yes side were 1 up at that stage.
Go on the Yes side.

jobbridge4life · 22-05-2015 02:07PM

RobertKK wrote: »

If this was a referendum and it was titled, 'Do you respect, cherish and love your fellow citizens who are homosexual'. I would not have to think about it and it would be a most definite yes.
If I vote no, it doesn't mean I have anything against anyone. It is not how I live my life. I live by doing what I believe.
January of 2014, I sent in a text to Newstalk, it was read out, a person who appears on the show regularly called me a bigot for believing marriage is between a man and a woman, and I was told not to vote on it. That has nothing to do with you, but that reply I got shocked me.
I would say fair enough if I hated gay people, which I don't. But this Yes voter was also calling all no voters bigots.
I am accepting of other people to hold views contrary to mine, that is their right, it is not upto me to judge other people on their views, I don't know how or what circumstances helped form their views, so to judge would be wrong.
So tomorrow when the expected Yes result ensues, I will not be bitter and twisted over it, like some are with a referendum that happened in 1983. I will say well done to the Yes side. I believe if one believes in Yes or No, they are right to fight for what they believe, and in a civilised manner.
I don't hate or dislike anyone here, we may just disagree, but once people are being honest that is the most important thing.
I will be highly surprised if No wins, and lets say for argument sake they do, I don't believe it would be right to be triumphant about it. I don't believe whatever the result it should be about rubbing people's faces in it.
Both sides argued for what they believed, and I think everyone will be relieved it will be over.
I don't think my vote will make any difference, it will have more bearing on the by election.

The hurt and shock you felt RobertKK is the reason you should vote yes, not because the person was right and not just to take the easy road. That hurt and shock is a similar feeling to the sensation of being ostracised by society, of being bullied for who you love. For knowing that no matter what you do in life you can never fully be an equal citizen.

Its the same pain Robert because at the end of the day we are all the same. I am of God, so is my partner. The love we feel for each-other is Gods love. How could it be anything else? A yes vote allows gay people to participate fully in the life of the state as complete citizens. It takes from no one, it hurts no one, it changes no ones marriage.

RobertKK · 22-05-2015 02:08PM

K4t wrote: »

Exactly. And while one side values equality, the other does not. Congrats on finally getting it.

But that is you putting your spin on my post, which is not what I said.

AtomicHorror · 22-05-2015 02:08PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

The actual way they are voting is not relevant. Many of these people left during the 2008-2011 exodus.

How many? Specifically of those returning and actually voting?

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

It's beyond me how anyone can condone the behaviour of these people, let alone celebrate it.

Most of us are actually just questioning what proportion are ineligible and voting. The claim keeps being made that it's a non-specific "many", but nobody has any facts to back it up.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

While the proposed amendment will have little effect on people that live here, it will have no effect on those that don't.

I'd say it'll have as little effect on resident heterosexuals too, but we're still allowed to vote on what happens to homosexuals.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Why should those who have no right to a say in our laws determine what they should be?

You haven't demonstrated that they lack the right.

tayto lover · 22-05-2015 02:08PM

the groutch wrote: »

How is it petty?
It's about respecting the law of the land, something lacking in those who are illegally voting.

People who are not entitled to vote should not be voting regardless of whatever side they favour.

Zubeneschamali · 22-05-2015 02:09PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Why should those who have no right to a say in our laws determine what they should be?

They should have a say, as they do in every other European country, bar Greece.

whatismyname · 22-05-2015 02:09PM

galljga1 wrote: »

Is it just me or does anyone else think this is a massive over-reaction?

No doubt some others will, but I definitely don't.

I chose to emigrate from Ireland, and am not entitled to vote in the referendum. If I chose to register and vote nevertheless, I would expect a fair amount of disgust and outrage.

I'm talking generally if I was to do this in any referendum or election in Ireland, not this one specifically .

For this referendum, a part of me would love to do this and show my support and play my part in changing Ireland for the better, but I have respect for the voting process, and don't believe it would be right for me to do.

mylefttesticle · 22-05-2015 02:09PM

RobertKK wrote: »

I have a lot of issues with civil marriage, before one even goes near same sex marriage. I don't have time to air them, but I have posted about it in the past.
I don't see what is great about wanting the state to regulate one's private life and who they love.

Well unless you secretly planning on becoming a dictator then you better get used to having to share this land with people with different stances than you.

I hate marriage and will never marry but i voted yes today because many people who want to cant and they should have the same rights as me even though i will never exercise that right.

AtomicHorror · 22-05-2015 02:10PM

MathDebater wrote: »

I'm going to lodge a complaint with evidence that at least four people who voted where not resident in the state since Christmas 2011. This isn't about a yes or no vote to me. It's much bigger than that. Talking about it with anonymous posters won't change it and it will occur again unless it's widely reported.

I think you should. But I also think you're generalising based on a very limited sample set.

whatismyname · 22-05-2015 02:10PM

tayto lover wrote: »

People who are not entitled to vote should not be voting regardless of whatever side they favour.

Hear hear. Simple as that.

Zubeneschamali · 22-05-2015 02:11PM

MathDebater wrote: »

If you think reporting people for committing electoral fraud is petty and sad, then that says a lot more about you than I.

Evidence that a crime was committed? A tweet and a facebook update? I see.

(Nods and smiles, pretends to write in daybook...)

swampgas · 22-05-2015 02:11PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

The actual way they are voting is not relevant. Many of these people left during the 2008-2011 exodus.

It's beyond me how anyone can condone the behaviour of these people, let alone celebrate it. While the proposed amendment will have little effect on people that live here, it will have no effect on those that don't. Why should those who have no right to a say in our laws determine what they should be?

Many people who emigrate hope to return one day, perhaps to settle down and start a family. I imagine many of the people returning to vote are doing so because it may very well impact on their lives at some point in the future.

Do you really think those who emigrate should be forced to abandon any hope of ever returning? Or think they should not be allowed to care about what kind of country they may be returning to?

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

Comments