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
12467…335

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    jimboblep wrote: »
    This is what im talking about arguments like this sway me back to the yes camp how it would help fellow citizens is how it should be presented what annoys me is that anyone who so much as asks a question is attacked instantly as I have been already for merely voicing a different opinion

    That is an individual, you can't lump all gay people together based on a few extreme views. Do you judge all No voters on the basis of what Iona says?


  • Options
    #93
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    jimboblep wrote: »
    I never said that my point is that the attitude of some people on the yes side, of saying vote yes just because and deriding anyone who raises legitimate questions rather than simply highlighting the positives of a yes vote , are what is annoying me
    equating people with being homophobic bigots for simply asking for thieir side of the argument is whats making me possibly consider a no vote

    I've yet to hear anyone raising a legitimate argument against marriage equality. Again and again, they use the same old well-defeated arguments. When those arguments fail, they resort to extreme diversionary tactics like polygamy or incest. In most cases, prominent opponents of marriage equality are from a religious background. It would be easier to respect them if they cited their religious beliefs as a reason for their opposition, and argued from that standpoint, rather than pretending that they care about polygamy.


  • Options
    #94
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,547 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    reprise wrote: »
    Where did I say the extremes of no side were perfectly ok?

    Did I say extremes? Also, by voting no, you're supporting the no side.


  • Options
    #95
    RobertKK
    Registered Users Posts: 33,727 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Skylinehead wrote: »
    So if it's a solicitor, what's to stop two gay people from marrying? Obviously the church won't, but a solicitor would.

    No one.

    A referendum would be needed before this to remove marriage from the constitution.


  • Options
    #96
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,274 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    RobertKK wrote: »
    The marriage bureau, a NGO funded by the marriage license.

    And who exactly is going to set up this fictional NGO?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    sup_dude wrote: »
    I really seriously want an answer from either or both of you. Why is it okay for the no side to get nasty, but not for the yes side to defend that? Why is the name calling, the lies, the assumptions, the refusal to listen to proof... why is all that perfectly okay to you?

    I dont think you get my point
    what im trying to say is the yes side should hold the higher ground and point out why its a good thing to vote yes which is what will get most people to vote yes
    no where in my posts have I attacked gay people just pointed out my disagreement with an attitude I have encountered both here and real life of if you even ask a question you are not worthy of an answer because you are a braindead knuckledragger.


  • Options
    #98
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    jimboblep wrote: »
    Again you do it
    you make no mention of any positive reasons to vote just attack me can you not see any irony in this
    Vote whatever way you bloody want, I really don't care, but to change your vote from a Yes to a No because you don't like some of the Yes side's attitudes is bizarre and make me seriously question your integrity and motives for posting here. It sounds like a ploy resulting from an Iona brainstorming session.


  • Options
    #99
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    RayM wrote: »
    I've yet to hear anyone raising a legitimate argument against marriage equality. Again and again, they use the same old well-defeated arguments. When those arguments fail, they resort to extreme diversionary tactics like polygamy or incest. In most cases, prominent opponents of marriage equality are from a religious background. It would be easier to respect them if they cited their religious beliefs as a reason for their opposition, and argued from that standpoint, rather than pretending that they care about polygamy.

    How has that got anything to do with what I said


  • Options
    #100
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    jimboblep wrote: »
    I never said that my point is that the attitude of some people on the yes side, of saying vote yes just because and deriding anyone who raises legitimate questions rather than simply highlighting the positives of a yes vote , are what is annoying me

    Such as?
    jimboblep wrote: »
    equating people with being homophobic bigots for simply asking for thieir side of the argument is whats making me possibly consider a no vote

    So you would vote no because of someone being a dick on the internet while the no side can say anything it wants?


  • Options
    #101
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,547 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    jimboblep wrote: »
    I dont think you get my point
    what im trying to say is the yes side should hold the higher ground and point out why its a good thing to vote yes which is what will get most people to vote yes
    no where in my posts have I attacked gay people just pointed out my disagreement with an attitude I have encountered both here and real life of if you even ask a question you are not worthy of an answer because you are a braindead knuckledragger.

    By voting no, you are attacking the rights of gay people. Voting no because some people (out of thousands) got pissed off at the fact that they had to listen to the same crap over and over is essentially telling them that their rights to marriage and their feelings and psychological welfare is not that important to you. By voting no, you're enabling and supporting the damaging arguments the no side are presenting.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    jimboblep wrote: »
    I dont think you get my point
    what im trying to say is the yes side should hold the higher ground and point out why its a good thing to vote yes which is what will get most people to vote yes
    no where in my posts have I attacked gay people just pointed out my disagreement with an attitude I have encountered both here and real life of if you even ask a question you are not worthy of an answer because you are a braindead knuckledragger.

    I agree with you but its very hard to do that when your relationship is being attacked. What it boils down to for most gay people and their loved ones is their civil rights. My daughter doesn't even want to get married but its so much more than that. Its about how we as a country view our gay citizens and how we believe they should be treated. I don't see any reason why one of my children should have the right to do something the other can't simply by virtue of the people they love. Its not right. I don't care if my kids marry because its their choice but if they don't I want it to be for that reason - because they choose not to, not because they don't have the option.


  • Options
    #103
    DeJa VooDoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 684 ✭✭✭DeJa VooDoo


    How many times must iona be mentioned one every thread involving homosexuals?
    It's like their big bad wolf.....


  • Options
    #104
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    jimboblep wrote: »
    How has that got anything to do with what I said

    If people are being derided, it's because they aren't raising legitimate questions.


  • Options
    #105
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    DeJa VooDoo wrote: »
    How many times must iona be mentioned one every thread involving homosexuals?
    It's like their big bad wolf.....

    Around the same amount of times they mention homosexuals on a daily basis. So about 572.


  • Options
    #106
    RobertKK
    Registered Users Posts: 33,727 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Zaph wrote: »
    And who exactly is going to set up this fictional NGO?

    The government would need a referendum to remove marriage from the constitution and bring various groups in society who have an interest in marriage together so you would have religious groups, secular groups and minorities come together so when they marry people it is a simple process. One could use their solicitor if none of the above groups suited.

    People over rely on the state. The less state the more freedom we have.


  • Options
    #107
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    K4t wrote: »
    Vote whatever way you bloody want, I really don't care, but to change your vote from a Yes to a No because you don't like some of the Yes side's attitudes is bizarre and make me seriously question your integrity and motives for posting here. It sounds like a ploy resulting from an Iona brainstorming session.

    You question my motives I think you should read some of your posts on the emma watson thread before you cast aspersions on other peoples integrity
    as for the iona institite show me where I have attacked gay people or even referenced religion in this thread


  • Options
    #108
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    RayM wrote: »
    If people are being derided, it's because they aren't raising legitimate questions.

    The question I have raised is should the yes campaign highlight the positive reasons for voting yes such as codifying inheritance laws
    rather than telling people to vote yes just because we say so and accusing people who ask why of being homophobic and a neanderthal


  • Options
    #109
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,485 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    After examining the debate for a considerable time I will be voting "Yes".

    Now I will have to examine the pros and cons of gay adoption before that referendum takes place, if ever. It will be a lot closer i'd say.


  • Options
    #110
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,274 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    RobertKK wrote: »
    The government would need a referendum to remove marriage from the constitution and bring various groups in society who have an interest in marriage together so you would have religious groups, secular groups and minorities come together so when they marry people it is a simple process. One could use their solicitor if none of the above groups suited.

    Fair enough, although I'd have my doubts that such a referendum would pass, in the highly unlikely event that it would ever take place.
    RobertKK wrote: »
    People over rely on the state. The less state the more freedom we have.

    I'd dispute that. Earlier in the thread you said that you were voting no because the referendum wouldn't allow the freedom of polygamy. The state didn't just prohibit polygamy on a whim, it's illegal because societal norms dictate that polygamy is unacceptable in our society. Ironically those norms would initially have come from the church. Had Ireland been a predominately Muslim country the societal norms would have been different and polygamy may have been a possibility.

    Even ignoring the whole polygamy thing, there still would have to be state involvement even if an NGO like you proposed was set up as tax treatment for married couples is different than for single people so the state would still need records of marriages.


  • Options
    #111
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    eviltwin wrote: »
    I agree with you but its very hard to do that when your relationship is being attacked. What it boils down to for most gay people and their loved ones is their civil rights. My daughter doesn't even want to get married but its so much more than that. Its about how we as a country view our gay citizens and how we believe they should be treated. I don't see any reason why one of my children should have the right to do something the other can't simply by virtue of the people they love. Its not right. I don't care if my kids marry because its their choice but if they don't I want it to be for that reason - because they choose not to, not because they don't have the option.

    Well said Thats exactly how it should be presented to people
    which is the point im trying to make
    the majority of people would respect this


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    jimboblep wrote: »
    You question my motives I think you should read some of your posts on the emma watson thread before you cast aspersions on other peoples integrity
    I have read them, I wrote them. I have no idea what you mean by that statement.
    as for the iona institite show me where I have attacked gay people or even referenced religion in this thread
    The iona institute don't attack gay people or always reference religion, they complicate and change the argument to support their side. I was comparing your stance to something which they might do, not saying you are a part of the organisation.


  • Options
    #113
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    tayto lover wrote: »
    After examining the debate for a considerable time I will be voting "Yes".

    Now I will have to examine the pros and cons of gay adoption before that referendum takes place, if ever. It will be a lot closer i'd say.

    Don't think there's set to be a referendum on that one, I could be mistaken though?


  • Options
    #114
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,485 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    Don't think there's set to be a referendum on that one, I could be mistaken though?

    If this goes through which I think is highly likely then the other will follow for sure.


  • Options
    #115
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,547 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Now I will have to examine the pros and cons of gay adoption before that referendum takes place, if ever. It will be a lot closer i'd say.

    As far as I'm aware (completely open for correction on this), the adoption issue isn't going through referendum and will be dealt with before the marriage referendum.


  • Options
    #116
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    tayto lover wrote: »
    If this goes through which I think is highly likely then the other will follow for sure.

    I think it's just being written into law before this referendum though. Again, I could be wrong but that's how I understand it.

    Edit: Beaten to it!


  • Options
    #117
    looking_around
    Registered Users Posts: 2,491 ✭✭✭looking_around


    I don't vote....ever.

    I often think about it..but then don't. #shrugs#

    this will probably be no different.

    however I totally agree with same sex marriage.


  • Options
    #118
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,016 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    jimboblep wrote: »
    The question I have raised is should the yes campaign highlight the positive reasons for voting yes such as codifying inheritance laws
    rather than telling people to vote yes just because we say so and accusing people who ask why of being homophobic and a neanderthal

    As opposed to the no campaign whcih tells us it's because of sodomy being too loud?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #119
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,274 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    looking_around wrote: »
    I don't vote....ever.

    I often think about it..but then don't. #shrugs#

    this will probably be no different.

    however I totally agree with same sex marriage.

    So why not vote to show your support? Unfortunately that sort of indifference could ultimately be the cause of the no side winning, as they will be mobilising their supporters like it was D-Day all over again.


  • Options
    #120
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    looking_around wrote: »
    I don't vote....ever.

    I often think about it..but then don't. #shrugs#

    this will probably be no different.

    however I totally agree with same sex marriage.

    Please go out and use your vote.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,485 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    sup_dude wrote: »
    As far as I'm aware (completely open for correction on this), the adoption issue isn't going through referendum and will be dealt with before the marriage referendum.

    Can't understand the need for one and not the other tbh.
    I would have thought that marriage equality would breeze through and the adoption question would need a referendum.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement