Claire Byrne Live (RTE1)

BlaasForRafa

RobertKK wrote: »

They could be more traditional, doesn't mean religion is the driving force.

Or they could just hate gays and be trying to cover that up by waffling on about ridiculous red herrings.

hotmail.com

Most of the programme dedicated to surrogacy. Bit mad given this is about civil marriage rights for same-sex couples.

United Chester Men

Un Croissant wrote: »

Claire is very very weak.

This girl had that annoying Disney twang.

I think she is doing a good job, not a hard debate to chair and I imagine she has strong views herself on the issue perhaps so to stay bias isn't easy. She perhaps is a little weak on the legislative aspect but she is llooking great so I'll forgive her!!

Un Croissant

So nothing wrong...

United Chester Men

I WANT TO CONTROL HOW MY CHILDREN ARE EXPOSED TO GAY MARRIAGE!!!

Jesus, that man was saved by the break.....

He was on the "No" side I assume??

Un Croissant

United Chester Men wrote: »

I think she is doing a good job, not a hard debate to chair and I imagine she has strong views herself on the issue perhaps so to stay bias isn't easy. She perhaps is a little weak on the legislative aspect but she is llooking great so I'll forgive her!!

I think she's very weak with keeping a lid on Ronan. She needs to knock him back when he runs over. Even Fidelma jumped in off mic.

FixdePitchmark

coolhull wrote: »

On this issue, we can debate it, we can twitter it, we can post on these threads, but the only certain way to ensure a positive result is to go out on referendum day and vote ''Yes.''
Anything else is just blather......

Or - No.

retro:electro

anna080 wrote: »

Someone please help me out here, straight couples have been adopting for years, what's the difference? Why now all the furore?

Someone help me

Un Croissant

United Chester Men wrote: »

I WANT TO CONTROL HOW MY CHILDREN ARE EXPOSED TO GAY MARRIAGE!!!

Jesus, that man was saved by the break.....

He was on the "No" side I assume??

Yep. He'll be moving to another place soon enough I'd say.

ROAAAR

Watching programmes such as this really make me wonder as to which way the public will vote.
Personally I'll be voting yes. When you break it all down I think a gay couple should be treated equally by the state as a heterosexual couple.

Woodville56

Happyman42 wrote: »

Coveney is having a mare. Awful public persona, perpetually sullen as if hiding something

Smug and arrogant , just like his party colleagues - not at all convinced by his performance. I would love to ask him why his party is afraid to allow a free vote / free expression among its elected members on this issue - what are they afraid of ???

United Chester Men

Un Croissant wrote: »

Yep. He'll be moving to another place soon enough I'd say.

So I was hearing correct?! He actually said that, in advocacy/support to a No vote?

hotmail.com

Woodville56 wrote: »

Smug and arrogant , just like his party colleagues - not at all convinced by his performance. I would love to ask him why his party is afraid to allow a free vote / free expression among its elected members on this issue - what are they afraid of ???

All FG TDs will be voting in private I presume!

eviltwin

United Chester Men wrote: »

So I was hearing correct?! He actually said that, in advocacy/support to a No vote?

Gotta hand it to that man he made Ronan look reasonable.

Atlantic Dawn

ROAAAR wrote: »

Watching programmes such as this really make me wonder as to which way the public will vote.
Personally I'll be voting yes. When you break it all down I think a gay couple should be treated equally by the state as a heterosexual couple.

The angle it's going is on the rights of the child to either hetero or same sex parents, predominantly on adopted or currently unborn children.

YFlyer

Artificial means lol.

Un Croissant

Noooo noooooo... too many conspiracy theorists in the audience don't trust "experts".

RayM

RobertKK wrote: »

They could be more traditional, doesn't mean religion is the driving force.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that maybe, just maybe, the views of the likes of Ronan Mullen and the Iona Institute stem from their religious beliefs. They start off with their conclusion (gay people are inferior) and then scramble around for a premise (children, children, surrogacy, surrogacy polygamy...)

There is not one valid argument against Marriage Equality. If there was, we would have heard it by now.

Woodville56

hotmail.com wrote: »

All FG TDs will be voting in private I presume!

How many of them have expressed ( or been allowed to express) opposing views ? Across all parties, a number of TD's privately oppose this referendum

United Chester Men

Poor Coveney is starting to fade a bit. hard to keep your cool listening to Mullen though.

BlaasForRafa

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Or - No.

So what are the legitimate reasons to vote no. We already know that adoption/parenting/surrogacy is a red herring so what are the real reasons?

Un Croissant

That self hating gay fella definitely isn't in the majority. I'm sure he has admitted it in the past. Why why he shouting "how do you know"?

coolhull

Woodville56 wrote: »

Smug and arrogant , just like his party colleagues - not at all convinced by his performance. I would love to ask him why his party is afraid to allow a free vote / free expression among its elected members on this issue - what are they afraid of ???

It doesn't matter a damn what his party, or any political party, thinks. Thankfully, the people are the ones to decide.......

golfball37

Hard to imagine every FG TD will vote yes despite what they say.

Un Croissant

1000s of years? Really?

FixdePitchmark

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

So what are the legitimate reasons to vote no. We already know that adoption/parenting/surrogacy is a red herring so what are the real reasons?

It isn't a family. It is a partnership.

Fleawuss

The smokescreen is surrogacy. It's a screen for bigotry and justifying prejudice.

Un Croissant

Lovely to hear from the cross dressing sub culture. often forgotten about.

hotmail.com

Woodville56 wrote: »

How many of them have expressed ( or been allowed to express) opposing views ? Across all parties, a number of TD's privately oppose this referendum

No idea. If all of them said they were voting No publicly, would that change how you feel about it?

Woodville56

coolhull wrote: »

It doesn't matter a damn what his party, or any political party, thinks. Thankfully, the people are the ones to decide.......

Then why not allow FG TD's free speech on this issue - why the diktat from Kenny to follow the party line ??