Gay Marriage/Marriage Equality/End of World?

silverharp

Isaac "Phelps" sounding a bit repressed.


http://www.thejournal.ie/same-sex-marriage-sexual-acts-2071775-Apr2015/

aloyisious

silverharp wrote: »

Isaac "Phelps" sounding a bit repressed.


http://www.thejournal.ie/same-sex-marriage-sexual-acts-2071775-Apr2015/

I'm not going to google on Isaac's family background. The name Burke ring's bells though. Is he a member of the very religiously-committed family of that name which has protested outside Leinster House on Kildare St, along with the Joe Duffy radio show?

Bannasidhe

aloyisious wrote: »

I'm not going to google on Isaac's family background. The name Burke ring's bells though. Is he a member of the very religiously-committed family of that name which has protested outside Leinster House on Kildare St, along with the Joe Duffy radio show?

Yup.
Isaac brother of Enoch who is, allegedly, no relation to a Martina Burke from Castlebar who phoned Joe Duffy complaining about a certain mural in Dublin. By coincidence Enoch Burke, also from Castlebar, was so upset by a certain mural in Dublin he also phoned Joe to offer his support to the stranger who just happened to have the same name and be from the same town as his mother.

BlaasForRafa

robindch wrote: »

His wife seems to have become ill first, then he seems to have made his unhelpful comments.

While a cynic might believe he's exiting because of the latter using the former as partial cover, in truth, only he, and perhaps those close to him politically and socially, know why he actually decided to resign.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/dup-s-jim-wells-resigns-after-same-sex-child-abuse-comments-1.2190498

Only a DUP member could go out door-to-door canvassing for votes and end up insulting one of his constituents.

alaimacerc

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Only a DUP member could go out door-to-door canvassing for votes and end up insulting one of his constituents.

One of his own voters, even. And end up de-converting them.

That's some special sauce.

Delirium

Why surrogacy has nothing to do with same-sex marriage

One of the few significant studies has been carried out by the University of Huddersfield Repository, which collects, analyses and makes data publicly available. Using both data from organisations involved in surrogacy and UK government data on parental orders (which give legal parental rights to couples using surrogacy), the university was able to produce an authoritative analysis of trends in the UK, which are probably the best indicator of what might happen in Ireland if we follow their legislative regime.

The first thing that is clear from this study is that the majority of those having recourse to surrogacy are heterosexual couples, usually married, seeking to establish a family composed of a mother and a father with the maximum possible biological link to their child or children – a “traditional family” as understood by most people.

Under the UK’s 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, commissioning parents had to be married, aged over 18, domiciled in the UK and at least one had to be the child’s genetic parent. Commercial surrogacy was not allowed. The Act provided for “parental orders” making the commissioning parents the legal parents of the child.

In 1995, the first year of its operation, there were 50 parental orders made, and from then until 2007 there were between 36 and 51 annually, rising to 83 over the next three years.

In 2010 the law changed to allow same-sex couples and unmarried heterosexual couples in “an enduring family relationship” to avail of surrogacy arrangements. In 2011, the first full year of the new regime, and the most recent for which figures were available to the study, saw a jump to 149 parental orders.

While there has been no consistent collection of data on who was seeking the orders, the Huddersfield study cites figures from the government agency Cafcass that there were 29 successful gay couple applicants and three successful lesbian couple applicants for parental orders that year. This probably includes some pent-up demand. The study suggested much of the rest was accounted for by unmarried people in “an enduring family relationship”.

The authors also speculate that some of the increase was accounted for by a growth in surrogacy arrangements made abroad.

So, in the UK, which has a liberal surrogacy regime, in the last year for which Huddersfield had figures almost 80 per cent of applicants for parental orders were heterosexual couples, and the majority of those were married.

alaimacerc

SW wrote: »

Why surrogacy has nothing to do with same-sex marriage

The real reason, though, is that it's not yet covered in Irish law at all. There's a draft bill in the offing, but this government or any future one could do as it pleases, regardless of the MEA ref outcome. All the way from "surrogacy -- benned!" to "free kid to anyone with a pulse". Well, more or less.

I note there's some desperate reaching in the No leaflets that the SC could find that a "right to have a child" exists in the Constitution, and that would have consequences in this area. There evidence for this being in any way likely seems to have turned up entirely missing, however.

Shrap

Worth sharing this one in full.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/td-catherine-murphy-has-restored-credibility-to-politics-31176652.html

Privilege of equal rights

I feel very privileged that for my 40th birthday, I will receive the gift of voting for equal rights in Ireland. It's not every day that we get the chance to be part of a civil rights movement. So why do I feel so passionate about voting 'Yes' in the upcoming referendum?
Is it because I have two gay siblings and I want them to enjoy the same civil rights that I do?
Is it because my husband is brown-skinned and, had a civil rights movement not allowed "persons of colour" to marry white people, my marriage and my children would not exist?
Is it because had a civil rights movement not allowed persons of different religions to get married, my marriage and my children would not exist?
Is it because had my in-laws not been liberal enough to allow their son to enter into a "love marriage" as opposed to an arranged marriage, my marriage and my children would not exist?
Thanks to the courageous people who lobbied for these rights for generations, I have a lovely, happy family.
Do I feel that my marriage or my family will be jeopardised in any way by my siblings and my counterparts enjoying the same civil rights I do? Absolutely not!
Is my delight at being part of this civil rights movement solely based on the selfish reasons above?
I don't believe it is. I think it goes deeper than that. I may not be Rosa Parks but I will have the ability to remove an inequality. I will have the chance to vote for something that is fundamentally right, to say "I am not more equal than you, I don't deserve more civil rights than you".
In a country that has fought so long and hard for the right to vote, the right to own property, the right to plan our families and the right to peace, we must grab this opportunity with both hands and say to all our citizens: "we are all equally equal, even the 10pc who are currently marginalised".
Sarah Nic Lochlainn
Ardee, Co Louth

aloyisious

Bump for MarriagEquality. A YES Equality shop has opened it's doors from 11 AM today in Stephens Green Shopping Centre beside the Meteor Store across from the Yankee Candle shop. Get your gear here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkwYEhjjZhs

robindch

Reports are emerging that Pope Frank took time out from his busy schedule to reject the appointment of Laurent Stefanini, the French government's nominee for the position of French Ambassador to the Vatican.

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/uncucumbered/pope_francis_personally_rejected_gay_french_ambassador

I wonder if the French might take the opportunity to close down a useless embassy, now that the Vatican doesn't seem to enjoy the French choice of Ambassador.

Shrap

robindch wrote: »

Reports are emerging that Pope Frank took time out from his busy schedule to reject the appointment of Laurent Stefanini, the French government's nominee for the position of French Ambassador to the Vatican.

W :mad: NKER.

Doctor Jimbob

wp_rathead

Brian Shanahan

robindch wrote: »

Reports are emerging that Pope Frank took time out from his busy schedule to reject the appointment of Laurent Stefanini, the French government's nominee for the position of French Ambassador to the Vatican.

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/uncucumbered/pope_francis_personally_rejected_gay_french_ambassador

I wonder if the French might take the opportunity to close down a useless embassy, now that the Vatican doesn't seem to enjoy the French choice of Ambassador.

Shrap wrote: »

W :mad: NKER.

I told ye, he's the same as the old boss.

recedite

Here's a contradictory "report".

For now, signs are that both the French government and the Holy See will proceed with the appointment. Given the Pope’s implicit approval of the appointment, the Vatican is unlikely to rule differently.

All these reports seem to be just speculation; its all "top secret" so far.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

Here's a contradictory "report".All these reports seem to be just speculation; its all "top secret" so far.

I'll be interested to see who's right on this one - either newcivilrights (which quoted something which quoted Reuters), or newsmax - repository of all that's worst in the US far right.

recedite

Well, two things are certain; the ambassador proposed by the French is openly (if discreetly) gay. And there is some problem in accepting him at the Vatican end.
The two are presumably connected, but whether Francis himself is trying to overcome the obstacle, or is making it worse, is hard to say at this point.

aloyisious

I've posted a link on the "how will you vote on the referendum" thread to an Irish Times link to an internal debate there recorded debate between Breda O'Brien and Noel Whelan, both I/T columnists. It's approx one (1) hour long so you had better set aside time to hear it in full. If you are payed-up to the I/T online version, it's on the Inside Politics section.

Delirium

aloyisious wrote: »

I've posted a link on the "how will you vote on the referendum" thread to an Irish Times link to an internal debate there recorded debate between Breda O'Brien and Noel Whelan, both I/T columnists. It's approx one (1) hour long so you had better set aside time to hear it in full. If you are payed-up to the I/T online version, it's on the Inside Politics section.

I'm able to get to it without being paid up to IT online.

Link:

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-and-noel-whelan-debate-same-sex-marriage-1.2192011

Delirium

https://twitter.com/funkyderek/status/593350623854260224

https://twitter.com/PantiBliss/status/593064460711030785

Penn

SW wrote: »

https://twitter.com/PantiBliss/status/593064460711030785

If I spent 10 years trying to come up with the most ridiculous, offensive, nonsensical, make-it-look-like-a-parody-even-though-it's-not-a-parody, bull**** leaflet... I still couldn't do half as good a job as that.

pH

Bad Horse wrote: »

If I spent 10 years trying to come up with the most ridiculous, offensive, nonsensical, make-it-look-like-a-parody-even-though-it's-not-a-parody, bull**** leaflet... I still couldn't do half as good a job as that.

Thankfully somebody did!

Bannasidhe

wp_rathead

Hitler was homosexual?

Bannasidhe

wp_rathead wrote: »

Hitler was homosexual?

No.

But he was a vegetarian.

BlaasForRafa

wp_rathead wrote: »

Hitler was homosexual?

Dunno, but what I do know is

"Hitler has only got one ball
The other is in the Albert Hall
His mother,
The dirty bugger
Cut it off when he was small

She put it, in a chestnut tree,
And farted it way out to sea,
Where the fishes,
Cleaned the dishes,
And had scollops,
And bollocks for tea"

Bannasidhe

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Dunno, but what I do know is


And had scollops,
And bollocks for tea"

So she had surf n turf then.

Delirium

"I'd like to order the homophobia hot-crust"

https://twitter.com/DarrenMcMahon54/status/593415280543535104/

robindch

SW wrote: »

"I'd like to order the homophobia hot-crust"

https://twitter.com/DarrenMcMahon54/status/593415280543535104/

God, why do the same individuals keep on coming up again, and again, and again and again...?

Turtwig

Yeah it's been ages since I've heard stuff by this guy. You have to admire their persistence I guess. Calvin Coolidge would be so proud.

aloyisious

robindch wrote: »

God, why do the same individuals keep on coming up again, and again, and again and again...?

They believe in the fund-a-mentals, right down to the outer limits.

robindch

Marriage equality is up before the US Supreme Court at the moment and the conservative and liberal sides have been strutting their stuff.

In the red corner, Antony Scalia's behaving more and more like a Fox News host:

Scalia wrote:

One of the problems is, when you think about these cases and the word that keeps coming back to me, in this case, is ‘millennia.’ [...] This definition has been with us for millennia. And it’s very difficult for the Court to say, ‘Oh, well, we know better.’

While in the blue corner, Ruth Bader Ginsburg cut to an unusual, interesting perspective with splendid precision:

Ginsberg wrote:

[Same-sex couples] wouldn’t be asking for this relief if the law of marriage was what it was a millennium ago. I mean, it wasn’t possible. Same-sex unions would not have opted into the pattern of marriage, which was a relationship, a dominant and a subordinate relationship. [...] There was a change in the institution of marriage to make it egalitarian when it wasn’t egalitarian. And same-sex unions wouldn’t — wouldn’t fit into what marriage was once.

wp_rathead

Susan "we shouldn't have decriminalised homosexuality" Phillips seems to be playing a blinder at a Marriage debate - video going to be uploaded soon I believe

Frank Bullitt

Ill put the popcorn on.

Hotblack Desiato

Listening to Breda 'debating' for a whole hour must be some sort of extreme masochistic fetish.

Couldn't the Irish Times have kept the suffering down to, say, five minutes??

Bannasidhe

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Listening to Breda 'debating' for a whole hour must be some sort of extreme masochistic fetish.

Couldn't the Irish Times have kept the suffering down to, say, five minutes??

I clicked on the link and couldn't hit play... feck listening to that like.
Played footie with the dogs and was the better for it.

Shrap

Nice IT letters this morning, especially this one.

Sir, – When two people, not bound by blood or kin, love each other to such a profound depth that they want to make a lifelong commitment of faithfulness to each other, then that deserves to be acknowledged, celebrated and solemnised. We are all the better for it – individuals, families, communities and society are life-enhanced – and God in his heaven rejoices. That’s why I will be voting Yes on May 22nd. – Yours, etc,
Fr ADRIAN EGAN, CSsR
Redemptorists,
Mount St Alphonsus,
Limerick.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/marriage-referendum-1.2193891

PopePalpatine

Jim Walsh is going to be on the Pat Kenny Show in a while...I don't know whether I'm morbidly curious enough to give that bigot my time.

Bannasidhe

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Jim Walsh is going to be on the Pat Kenny Show in a while...I don't know whether I'm morbidly curious enough to give that bigot my time.

Think I'll take the dogs for a walk....

The Black Oil

Careful now. Don't redefine dog walking.

Cabaal

More hatred from crazy religious people in Northern Ireland

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diFKHj5nC8U

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/04/30/sodomite-marriage/




ALSO

To off-set the hatred, here's a priest that says yes!

When two people, not bound by blood or kin, love each other to such a profound depth that they want to make a lifelong commitment of faithfulness to each other, then that deserves to be acknowledged, celebrated and solemnised. We are all the better for it – individuals, families, communities and society are life-enhanced – and God in his heaven rejoices. That’s why I will be voting Yes on May 22nd.

Fr Adrian Egan, CSsR
Redemptorists,
Mount St Alphonsus,
Limerick.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/04/30/priests-for-yes/

I'm guessing that parish will now be getting a new priest.....

Bannasidhe

The Black Oil wrote: »

Careful now. Don't redefine dog walking.

You're right... the dogs will take me for a walk. My roles are poop picker upper, treat dispenser and road traffic safety. I know my place.

robindch

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Listening to Breda 'debating' for a whole hour must be some sort of extreme masochistic fetish.

Given her catholic proclivities, I think of her and the rest of her friends in Lolek Ltd as "mass debaters".

joseph brand

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Jim Walsh is going to be on the Pat Kenny Show in a while...I don't know whether I'm morbidly curious enough to give that bigot my time.

I listened. Jim's not sharpest, it must be said. He said it was awful growing up without his father (who died at age 32, Jim was only 5). Through his meandering thoughts, he almost made the case for a Yes vote.
It should have been easy to take him to task, but his bigotry was diluted. I think he agreed that a child was better off with same sex parents than: hetero parents who often argue, and single parents.

Jim Walsh says "Vote Maybe!"

jooksavage

The VOTE NO posters are evrywhere in Kilkenny. I've only seen a handful of YES posters from Sinn Fein. Nothing from the other parties. I really hate to see posters of any kind going up (the place is already destroyed with stuff for the upcoming by-election) and I don't think we mindlessly vote for whatever we last saw dangling from a lamp-post but still... the disparity is unsettling.

Also, the posters themselves are misleading. This isn't a referendum on surrogacy. Doen't this material have to meet some kind of a standard? I don't know what's worse: the manipulative photos of sad children or the the downright insulting one that advises us "We've already got civil partnership".

I don't know why we don't ban all posters. It's wasteful and unsightly.

rainbow kirby

jooksavage wrote: »

I don't know why we don't ban all posters. It's wasteful and unsightly.

I really am loving the lack of election posters over here. 7 days to a general election in Ireland would mean the place would be absolutely destroyed with them.

joseph brand

Anyone catch Baroness Nuala O'Loan (I never heard of an O'Loan before) on Newstalk with Chris Donoghue?

She wrote a column in the Catholic newspaper about how she is a bit miffed that the GRA have asked their members to vote Yes.

I for one, will always endeavour to write the opinions of Lords, Barons, Kings and their female equivalents on my 3 ply paper, such is their value.

Monarchs and clergy make cosy bedfellows don't you agree?

lazygal

She also said she'd vote no and trotted out the usual guff about marriage between a man and a woman being special and unique.

Bannasidhe

lazygal wrote: »

She also said she'd vote no and trotted out the usual guff about marriage between a man and a woman being special and unique.

Her argument was completely from tradition but she was polite and insulted no one. She also said she believes homosexuals should have exactly the same legal rights as heterosexuals just not 'marriage'. Two things strike me about this - a) I wonder if Nuala would be happy if she 'cast her ballot' but men 'voted' and b) a same meat different name approach doesn't factor in the fact that the Irish Constitution uses the term 'marriage' to define who exactly gets certain rights and protections. This was not an issue in the UK which doesn't have a written Constitution.

jooksavage

lazygal wrote: »

She also said she'd vote no and trotted out the usual guff about marriage between a man and a woman being special and unique.

Of course. Some people seem to be worried that their marriage will somehow be lessened by a YES vote. Fine. Let them invent their own exclusive matrimonial contract and call it super-marriage or ultra-marriage or something and make it only available to ideologically-minded straight couples of child-bearing age and sufficient disposable income to support a large family (it's all about the kids, remember)