Marriage Equality Referendum

for general chat about stuff

Moderator: moderators

Do you approve of the proposed amendment to the Constitution?

Yes
35
81%
No
8
19%
Abstain
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 43

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby LeRouxIsPHat » May 19th, 2015, 4:37 pm

They're entitled to their opinions, they just shouldn't be entitled to talk about them in a referendum that has nothing to do with them.
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 9913
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby Dave Cahill » May 19th, 2015, 4:45 pm

offshorerules wrote:
Dave Cahill wrote:
offshorerules wrote:but those voting No are as entitled to their opinion as the those voting yes.


Its not an opinion though if its incorrect in fact. Its delusion.


In your opinion. To a lot of people God is fact, personally I think it a delusion and that is my opinion. Might be right, might be wrong but I guess I will find out eventually. Until then it remains my opinion and I feel entitled to express it.


An opinion based in known error is delusion. It has no validity. Any argument on the basis of it has no validity. Any statement made on the basis of it is a lie because the person making the statement knows it to be wrong.


Edit: Should have stated the 'known error' part previously
I have Bumbleflex
User avatar
Dave Cahill
Gordon D'Arcy
 
Posts: 20122
Joined: January 24th, 2006, 4:32 pm
Location: None of your damn business

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby The Doc » May 19th, 2015, 7:00 pm

Or to put it another way... Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not entitled to their own "facts".

The problem I have with the no campaign to date is that they have peddled opinion as fact. In actual fact they could have opened up a discussion about discomfort around same sex marriages or even a discussion about separating religious unions from civil unions and it would have been a lot more interesting.

But going with the argument of " every child needs their mother" when these c**ts were auctioning babies from the laundries and are still preventing full access to data is just not factual.

"Child first" posters from folks who move kiddy fiddlers around the country and then protect the data just doesn't hold up I'm afraid.
I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role.
I've got nothing against your right leg.
The trouble is ... neither have you
The Doc
Mullet
 
Posts: 1481
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby IanD » May 19th, 2015, 7:15 pm

Great article here. Really takes apart the whole arguement about the unchanging hollowed institution of marriage.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/finta ... -1.2217299


Funnily I remember the Divorce referendum and all the ''Hello Divorce Goodbye Daddy'' posters and stickers. Same cr@p peddled then as now with the think of the kids line.
Treat life like a dog: If you can't eat it, play with it, or hump it, p1$$ on it and walk away!
User avatar
IanD
Official Mascot
 
Posts: 1279
Joined: May 2nd, 2006, 1:51 pm
Location: Wicklow Town

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby LeRouxIsPHat » May 19th, 2015, 7:37 pm

The Doc wrote:Or to put it another way... Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not entitled to their own "facts".

The problem I have with the no campaign to date is that they have peddled opinion as fact.


Classic example of this is in one of the mother's and father's videos I watched. They had a pie chart showing that 92% of people believe a child should have a mother and father (or something along those lines anyway)...now that's fine, but I guarantee they were trying to give people the impression that that equated to a FACT that it was therefore the best way to raise a child.
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 9913
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby johng » May 19th, 2015, 7:37 pm

I remember voting in both divorce referenda and all 5 abortion ones. The further back you go the worse they were.
User avatar
johng
Leo Cullen
 
Posts: 16466
Joined: March 23rd, 2009, 11:37 pm
Location: Behind You!!

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby The Doc » May 19th, 2015, 7:41 pm

IanD wrote:Great article here. Really takes apart the whole arguement about the unchanging hollowed institution of marriage.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/finta ... -1.2217299


Funnily I remember the Divorce referendum and all the ''Hello Divorce Goodbye Daddy'' posters and stickers. Same cr@p peddled then as now with the think of the kids line.

Funny... Just shared that article elsewhere. I think it is a lovely concise piece of writing... Not often a fan of his tbh but I think its a great piece
I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role.
I've got nothing against your right leg.
The trouble is ... neither have you
The Doc
Mullet
 
Posts: 1481
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby Grumpy Old Man » May 19th, 2015, 8:11 pm

IanD wrote:A Hedge on the way to the Polling Station in Goatstown.

Image


With neighbours like that...
A proud Winsome Fluter
User avatar
Grumpy Old Man
Brian O'Driscoll
 
Posts: 6499
Joined: February 22nd, 2006, 4:22 pm
Location: Home for the Slightly Bewildered

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby Oldschool » May 20th, 2015, 6:24 pm

Interesting that so far 22 posters have voted yes and two have voted no and a lot of the usual posters have opted not to vote.
I doubt the real referendum will be anywhere near close to that kind of breakdown.
However a low poll would be very much to the benefit of a yes vote as the yes voters are likely to be more committed.

The real problem I see with this referendum is the lack of separation of secular marriage from church marriage.
Church marriage was to all intents and purposes designed to encourage procreation and the family unit in the biological sense.
The church's main problem with same sex marriage is that it doesn't meet that criteria and it would appear that other "church" married people have the same problem. Sure you can argue that with the advances of technology etc it is or will soon be possible for same sex partners to procreate but I doubt that this is at the forefront of most peoples thinking on the issue.
Had the church taken copyright on the use of the word Marriage to describe their version of marriage then the state would now have to refer to secular marriage by some other word or phrase and then there would be no problem or certainly less of a problem.

The main and a very strong motivation to vote yes would be for the very personal and intimate sakes of young people (in particular).
Issues of suicide and depression being to the forefront.
The motivation to vote no is more complex and less tangible but seems also to be very emotional.
And as usual the longer the debate has gone on, the confusion, spin and insults etc have increased.
At this point in time and for what it's worth I haven't made up my own mind on which way to vote.
I have also been surprised, quite frankly, at some of the people I know who have said they are voting No and feel quite strongly about it.
They are well educated, thought out and mild mannered and in touch with modern day society and have actually canvassed on the doorsteps.

The good news tho' is that Mrs School will be voting Yes, primarily based on reasons of humanity.
I definitely won't vote No but I'm not sure I'll vote Yes either which may explain the low turnout in Avenger's poll to date.
If I don't vote it will be the first time I have failed to vote in a referendum since I was able to do so.
There is still a lot to play for in the next couple of days and that is a good thing because the harder the fight the more worthy the cause.
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall who's the greatest player of them all? It is Drico your majesty.
User avatar
Oldschool
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 9777
Joined: March 27th, 2008, 2:10 pm

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby domhnallj » May 20th, 2015, 7:12 pm

I haven't voted because I don't have a vote otherwise I would stick my oar in.

Interestingly (or perhaps not) a recent paper on changing attitudes to same-sex marriage (published in Science no less (Science 12 December 2014: Vol. 346 no. 6215 pp. 1366-1369 ) has just been retracted because one of the authors fabricated his data (not once but also in their replication).

http://retractionwatch.com/2015/05/20/a ... ere-faked/
"That was shiterarse coaches need to look at themselves this is as bad at is.beem with school. Items impeovrnkyb neefedc"

Golf Man sums up the mood of a nation
User avatar
domhnallj
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2424
Joined: May 19th, 2011, 9:12 am

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby olaf the fat » May 21st, 2015, 6:34 pm

I might be wrong here, but does the constitution really need to change, from memory it currently does not define marriage as only between a man and a women but simply as marriage.
As the constitution does confer equal rights on all citizens a simple law change could have over ruled previous court rulings - with no hue and cry.
As they say in Russia, Goodbye in Russian
User avatar
olaf the fat
Malcolm O'Kelly
 
Posts: 3297
Joined: April 5th, 2006, 11:35 am
Location: On the sofa of perpetual pleasure

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby LeRouxIsPHat » May 21st, 2015, 6:58 pm

olaf the fat wrote:I might be wrong here, but does the constitution really need to change, from memory it currently does not define marriage as only between a man and a women but simply as marriage.
As the constitution does confer equal rights on all citizens a simple law change could have over ruled previous court rulings - with no hue and cry.


That's already been brought up and I could be wrong but I think the problem is that it could be changed again then. Well that's definitely A problem, but not sure if there are others.
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 9913
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby olaf the fat » May 22nd, 2015, 8:37 am

LeRouxIsPHat wrote:
olaf the fat wrote:I might be wrong here, but does the constitution really need to change, from memory it currently does not define marriage as only between a man and a women but simply as marriage.
As the constitution does confer equal rights on all citizens a simple law change could have over ruled previous court rulings - with no hue and cry.


That's already been brought up and I could be wrong but I think the problem is that it could be changed again then. Well that's definitely A problem, but not sure if there are others.


But we don't have a good record on accepting the results of referendums either :)

The yes nazi's have nearly pushed me into voting no. At this late stage I have nearly gone from certainly voting yes to undecided. There is equal amounts of muddled facts or completely wrong soundbites on each side, so much so its hard to get back to reality of it. Whilst I agree everybody is entitled to get married, (wait till you get there, and see how rosie it is!) everybody is entitled to an opinion or a question as well.

DC said its not an opinion if its based on a known error - how can you know if its an error if you dont drill through and question the facts? or is it just first come, best dressed in the enlightenment department?


BTW, in an discussion with somebody else, we both agreed if you did vote No you might have to lie about it.

Anyway, Ulster and Glasgow wont miss you for ten minutes this evening - get out and vote.
As they say in Russia, Goodbye in Russian
User avatar
olaf the fat
Malcolm O'Kelly
 
Posts: 3297
Joined: April 5th, 2006, 11:35 am
Location: On the sofa of perpetual pleasure

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby LeRouxIsPHat » May 22nd, 2015, 11:25 am

I think people voting no might have to ask themselves if they're afraid of what other people think of their opinion, or if they're afraid of it themselves.
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 9913
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby Dave Cahill » May 22nd, 2015, 11:50 am

LeRouxIsPHat wrote:I think people voting no might have to ask themselves if they're afraid of what other people think of their opinion, or if they're afraid of it themselves.


He shoots, he scores!
I have Bumbleflex
User avatar
Dave Cahill
Gordon D'Arcy
 
Posts: 20122
Joined: January 24th, 2006, 4:32 pm
Location: None of your damn business

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby Oldschool » May 22nd, 2015, 11:50 am

LeRouxIsPHat wrote:I think people voting no might have to ask themselves if they're afraid of what other people think of their opinion, or if they're afraid of it themselves.

It could just as easily be argued that people voting yes might have to ask themselves if they're afraid of what other people think of their opinion, or if they're afraid of it themselves.
People have a right to vote whichever way they want without snide remarks being passed about it.
It's a secret ballot for exactly that reason.
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall who's the greatest player of them all? It is Drico your majesty.
User avatar
Oldschool
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 9777
Joined: March 27th, 2008, 2:10 pm

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby offshorerules » May 22nd, 2015, 12:06 pm

Precisely.
"POC will not be going to Toulon" - All Blacks nil » May 27th, 2015, 12:18 am
User avatar
offshorerules
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2094
Joined: October 19th, 2012, 1:51 pm
Location: The Beverly Hills of South County Dublin

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby LeRouxIsPHat » May 22nd, 2015, 12:09 pm

There was nothing snide about what I said.

Of course people can vote no but regardless of which side you're on you should be able to justify it and do so with conviction. If you can't then you have to ask yourself why. Personally I think the bullying idea is nonsense for the most part.
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 9913
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby domhnallj » May 22nd, 2015, 12:19 pm

LeRouxIsPHat wrote:There was nothing snide about what I said.

Of course people can vote no but regardless of which side you're on you should be able to justify it and do so with conviction. If you can't then you have to ask yourself why. Personally I think the bullying idea is nonsense for the most part.


Surely it is the side that wishes to change the document that should forward the argument?
"That was shiterarse coaches need to look at themselves this is as bad at is.beem with school. Items impeovrnkyb neefedc"

Golf Man sums up the mood of a nation
User avatar
domhnallj
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2424
Joined: May 19th, 2011, 9:12 am

Re: Marriage Equality Referendum

Postby paddyor » May 22nd, 2015, 12:46 pm

Oldschool wrote:Had the church taken copyright on the use of the word Marriage to describe their version of marriage then the state would now have to refer to secular marriage by some other word or phrase and then there would be no problem or certainly less of a problem.

Which church? Marriage predates most religions.
Ruddock's tackle stats consistently too low for me to be taken seriously as a Six Nations blindside..... Ruddock's defensive stats don't stack up. - All Blacks Nil, Jan 15th, 2014
England A 8 - 14 Ireland A, 25th Jan 2014
Ruddock(c) 19/2 Tackles
paddyor
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2636
Joined: November 17th, 2012, 12:48 am

PreviousNext

Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest