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,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

How will you vote in the Marriage Equality referendum? Mod Note Post 1

Options
1…329330331332333335»

Comments

  • Options
    #10022
    RedPaddyX
    Registered Users Posts: 79 ✭✭RedPaddyX


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Marriage is between two people now. Marriage will be between two people whether this referendum passes or fails. So voting Yes or No this time has nothing to do with polygamy.

    If you want to marry several women and a gay penguin, go ahead and start a campaign to have a referendum on that issue.

    Meanwhile, why would you deny your gay fellow citizens the right to marry by voting No this time?


    But why the limitation on 2? What is so special about 2 people?


  • Options
    #10023
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,547 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    But why the limitation on 2? What is so special about 2 people?

    Because that's what is legal at the moment.


  • Options
    #10024
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,485 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    But why the limitation on 2? What is so special about 2 people?

    Special is having zero wives.


  • Options
    #10025
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    But why the limitation on 2? What is so special about 2 people?

    It would require a reworking of a lot of legislation. Everything is from the perspective of 2 people splitting things 50:50.

    With multiple people can they get married one by one or do they need to be married as a group? Is everyone married to everyone else or does John mary Ann and Mary but Mary and Ann arent married?

    The referendum is to allow 2 people to marry regardless of their genders. Nothing is preventing a referendum on polygamy.


  • Options
    #10026
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    But why the limitation on 2? What is so special about 2 people?

    Why just 'people'? What is so special about people?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #10027
    RedPaddyX
    Registered Users Posts: 79 ✭✭RedPaddyX


    sup_dude wrote: »
    Because that's what is legal at the moment.

    So are you personally ok with extending this to multiple persons if it came up as referendum next year? You care about equality afterall.


  • Options
    #10028
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    But why the limitation on 2? What is so special about 2 people?

    What is special about 2 people is that that is the current definition of marriage. Similarly, marriage is between two humans at present, no other species are allowed. Changing this would also require a referendum.

    So a guy, three girls and a gay penguin is right out, and you'll need to start a campaign for change if that is what you want.

    But it is nothing to do with the current referendum.


  • Options
    #10029
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,547 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    So are you personally ok with extending this to multiple persons if it came up as referendum next year? You care about equality afterall.


    I'd have no problem with it.


  • Options
    #10030
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    So are you personally ok with extending this to multiple persons if it came up as referendum next year? You care about equality afterall.

    Herp derp


  • Options
    #10031
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    Hyzepher wrote: »
    Surely those interested in a polygamous marriage would support the ssm as apart from anything else it gets them a step closer. There is no polygamous relationship that doesn't involve same sex interaction.

    I doubt anyone bringing it up are actually interested in it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #10032
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Marriage is between two people now. Marriage will be between two people whether this referendum passes or fails. So voting Yes or No this time has nothing to do with polygamy.

    If you want to marry several women and a gay penguin, go ahead and start a campaign to have a referendum on that issue.

    Meanwhile, why would you deny your gay fellow citizens the right to marry by voting No this time?
    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    Why just 'people'? What is so special about people?

    Consent


  • Options
    #10033
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    So are you personally ok with extending this to multiple persons if it came up as referendum next year? You care about equality afterall.

    Yeah Id be in favour too. Why not? If Truples or Quadruples or Octuples want to marry who am I to stop them?

    Ill bet itd be very complicated to arrange legally though so probably wont ever happen.


  • Options
    #10034
    RedPaddyX
    Registered Users Posts: 79 ✭✭RedPaddyX


    Not a NSA agent wrote: »
    It would require a reworking of a lot of legislation. Everything is from the perspective of 2 people splitting things 50:50.

    With multiple people can they get married one by one or do they need to be married as a group? Is everyone married to everyone else or does John mary Ann and Mary but Mary and Ann arent married?

    The referendum is to allow 2 people to marry regardless of their genders. Nothing is preventing a referendum on polygamy.

    Yes totally agree. But my point is this referendum is therefore not really about equality. In the words of a yes campaign, "there is no such thing as nearly equal"


  • Options
    #10035
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    So are you personally ok with extending this to multiple persons if it came up as referendum next year? You care about equality afterall.

    What you are attempting to do is so glaringly obvious and even if it weren't we've been through this almost word for word in this thread and in others.

    The referendum is not about 'equality' as some abstract total goal. If it were it would surely about the abolition of marriage in its entirety.

    So glib, so shallow. So pseudo-intellectual.


  • Options
    #10036
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    Yes totally agree. But my point is this referendum is therefore not really about equality. In the words of a yes campaign, "there is no such thing as nearly equal"

    Everyone is equally denied polygamous marriages.


  • Options
    #10037
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,547 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    Yes totally agree. But my point is this referendum is therefore not really about equality. In the words of a yes campaign, "there is no such thing as nearly equal"

    We've already gone over this. Just because it doesn't include every single bit of equality issues ever to exist, doesn't mean it's not still about equality.


  • Options
    #10038
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    Yes totally agree. But my point is this referendum is therefore not really about equality. In the words of a yes campaign, "there is no such thing as nearly equal"

    It creates equality between homosexual and heterosexual couples. If everything had to be made equal at the same time for it to be equality there would be no such thing as equality.


  • Options
    #10039
    RedPaddyX
    Registered Users Posts: 79 ✭✭RedPaddyX


    MrWalsh wrote: »
    Yeah Id be in favour too. Why not? If Truples or Quadruples or Octuples want to marry who am I to stop them?

    Ill bet itd be very complicated to arrange legally though so probably wont ever happen.

    Ok fair enough. Thanks for at least honestly answering my question. I have to admit I'm surprised but I agree it's the logical and coherent conclusion if you one is in favour of redefining it this time.


  • Options
    #10040
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    Yes totally agree. But my point is this referendum is therefore not really about equality. In the words of a yes campaign, "there is no such thing as nearly equal"

    Is this like the way the Suffragettes and the African-American Civil Rights Movement couldn't be said to have been looking for equality, because they didn't resolve every single legal issue, for everyone, ever?

    Great reasoning sir!


  • Options
    #10041
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,497 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    Yes totally agree. But my point is this referendum is therefore not really about equality. In the words of a yes campaign, "there is no such thing as nearly equal"

    "Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex"


    Those are the exact words with which you will be deciding yes or no. Again, it has nothing to do with polygamy. But of course, you already know that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #10042
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    RedPaddyX wrote: »
    Ok fair enough. Thanks for at least honestly answering my question. I have to admit I'm surprised but I agree it's the logical and coherent conclusion if you one is in favour of redefining it this time.

    No it isn't.


  • Options
    #10043
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    I'm beginning to wonder the few new reg posters who are looking for polygamy rights are all actually sitting at home beside each other right now :D


  • Options
    #10044
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    The thread is over 10k posts, so I've set up a second thread here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=95391600


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement