Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction

JONJO THE MISER

ronivek wrote: »

YouTube aren't promoting any side; that's how YouTube advertisements work. A "promoted video" is effectively just an advertisement. It's likely one of the 'Yes' campaign groups who have funded it.

As i said i do not go on youtube that often only for tunes when im after a few beers, its not a promoted video like a add but a video that has a larger video size in the what to watch segement, normally these segments have the same size but this was on the top and about 6 times the size of the rest, never saw that before.

ronivek

I bet it's like that; I have to put up with this crap all night long.

JONJO THE MISER

No as i said it was not like that, it was not a add, it was a recommended for me video but 6 times bigger than other videos that are recommended, i cant see it now all the recommended for you videos are back to the normal way side by side
and not enlarged.

Sofiztikated

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

No as i said it was not like that, it was not a add, it was a recommended for me video but 6 times bigger than other videos that are recommended, i cant see it now all the recommended for you videos are back to the normal way side by side
and not enlarged.

Is it possible you hit the large/cinema player button?

ronivek

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

No as i said it was not like that, it was not a add, it was a recommended for me video but 6 times bigger than other videos that are recommended, i cant see it now all the recommended for you videos are back to the normal way side by side
and not enlarged.

Well considering the amount of 'No' campaign spam I'm getting from YouTube; I think it's safe to say there's no conspiracy on their behalf to campaign for or otherwise support a 'Yes' vote.

It'll be over in a few days thankfully.

gravehold

ronivek wrote: »

I bet it's like that; I have to put up with this crap all night long.

Use ųblock or press that skip add button

meglome

ronivek wrote: »

Well considering the amount of 'No' campaign spam I'm getting from YouTube; I think it's safe to say there's no conspiracy on their behalf to campaign for or otherwise support a 'Yes' vote.

It'll be over in a few days thankfully.

How does a fringe group like the Iona 'Institute' or whatever name they are calling themselves get the large sums of money to place all these ads?

Sofiztikated

meglome wrote: »

How does a fringe group like the Iona 'Institute' or whatever name they are calling themselves get the large sums of money to place all these ads?

They don't disclose where the funds come from. By don't, I mean refuse.

Michael OBrien

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

It was the first video under what to watch when i went on youtube, when i normally go on youtube there are small screens of what to watch but this has enlarged, come on now i think we all know youtube is trying to promote the yes side.

Advertising is tracked these days. You get ads that reflect your viewing habits. They use google metrics. Basically if you view sites about certain topics or are from certain locations, or a combination of the above, google knows, and the ads follow you accordingly.

I get religious ads on YT all the time, because I am an atheist and view religious themed videos. I don't go around thinking YT is pushing Mormonism or scientology or creationism at me.

Not a NSA agent

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

It was the first video under what to watch when i went on youtube, when i normally go on youtube there are small screens of what to watch but this has enlarged, come on now i think we all know youtube is trying to promote the yes side.

Its machine learning, not an conspiracy against you. Youtube has algorithms to decide what may be of interest to you.

enda1

Anyone know what the plans are with civil partnership if the amendment passes?

Will my civil partnership with my partner of opposite sex finally be recognised by Ireland or will gay people now have actually more rights to relationship recognition?

Ave Sodalis

enda1 wrote: »

Anyone know what the plans are with civil partnership if the amendment passes?

Will my civil partnership with my partner of opposite sex finally be recognised by Ireland or will gay people now have actually more rights to relationship recognition?

There will be no new civil partnerships but those who have it, remain the same.

SF12

enda1 wrote: »

Anyone know what the plans are with civil partnership if the amendment passes?

Will my civil partnership with my partner of opposite sex finally be recognised by Ireland or will gay people now have actually more rights to relationship recognition?

Do you mean civil marriage? I'm confused by all this. I thought civil partnership was basically to allow non-religious ceremonies, regardless of the sexes involved. But it says on the referendum commission site that only same-sex couples can enter into civil partnerships. Opposite sex couples cannot. So - do you mean a civil marriage? And do civil marriages not already have the same rights as religious marriages?? (for want of a better description)

The more I dig into all of this, the more confused (and dubious) I get.

Ave Sodalis

SF12 wrote: »

Do you mean civil marriage? I'm confused by all this. I thought civil partnership was basically to allow non-religious ceremonies, regardless of the sexes involved. But it says on the referendum commission site that only same-sex couples can enter into civil partnerships. Opposite sex couples cannot. So - do you mean a civil marriage? And do civil marriages not already have the same rights as religious marriages?? (for want of a better description)

The more I dig into all of this, the more confused (and dubious) I get.

Away from the church, there is civil marriage and civil partnership. Civil marriage currently is only for straight people, and civil partnership is only for gay people. If the referendum passes, then there will be no more new civil partnerships and gay couples will have to use civil marriage, like straight couples.

Religious marriage is only a marriage when the civil part is performed.

SF12

sup_dude wrote: »

Away from the church, there is civil marriage and civil partnership. Civil marriage currently is only for straight people, and civil partnership is only for gay people. If the referendum passes, then there will be no more new civil partnerships and gay couples will have to use civil marriage, like straight couples.

Religious marriage is only a marriage when the civil part is performed.

Ah yes, I know the bit about the religious marriages. I hadn't realised that there was a difference between civil marriage and civil partnership though. Thanks.

Ave Sodalis

SF12 wrote: »

Ah yes, I know the bit about the religious marriages. I hadn't realised that there was a difference between civil marriage and civil partnership though. Thanks.

Yup, there's 160 differences in fact

SF12

Oh yeah, I got that. I just hadn't realised the marriage/partnership thing was "sex-specific"

enda1

SF12 wrote: »

Do you mean civil marriage? I'm confused by all this. I thought civil partnership was basically to allow non-religious ceremonies, regardless of the sexes involved. But it says on the referendum commission site that only same-sex couples can enter into civil partnerships. Opposite sex couples cannot. So - do you mean a civil marriage? And do civil marriages not already have the same rights as religious marriages?? (for want of a better description)

The more I dig into all of this, the more confused (and dubious) I get.

No I do mean civil partnership.
I have a civil partner who is of the opposite gender. It was conducted in France (a PACS) to allow for the easy provision for joint ownership and sharing of assets in the case of death (we were buying a house in France).

Ireland does not recognise our relationship however, which is bizarre. In it's attempt to bring in equality (back when civil partnerships were brought in) it instead brought in another layer of inequality.

So my relationship will STILL not be recognised after this bill? Had she been a man my relationship would be recognised? All seems very strange.

Lastly, why would they get rid of civil partnerships if they bring in equal marriage? They are not the same thing so why eliminate the choice of not getting married and only getting civilly partnered if one wants to?

Seems a very backwards step.

seamus

enda1 wrote: »

Anyone know what the plans are with civil partnership if the amendment passes?

Will my civil partnership with my partner of opposite sex finally be recognised by Ireland or will gay people now have actually more rights to relationship recognition?

The new marriage bill will allow those currently in a civil partnership to get married. Unfortunately there'll be no "fast-track" system to upgrade it, it's the same process.

At present it is not possible for someone in a civil partnership to get married (e.g. a bisexual woman in CP with a woman who wants to marry a man). As I understand it you can get married to your existing civil partner, but if you want a different partner, you will need to get your CP dissolved first.

People who want to retain their civil partnership can do so and it will continue as valid as before. New civil partnerships will not be available.

enda1

seamus wrote: »

The new marriage bill will allow those currently in a civil partnership to get married. Unfortunately there'll be no "fast-track" system to upgrade it, it's the same process.

At present it is not possible for someone in a civil partnership to get married (e.g. a bisexual woman in CP with a woman who wants to marry a man). As I understand it you can get married to your existing civil partner, but if you want a different partner, you will need to get your CP dissolved first.

People who want to retain their civil partnership can do so and it will continue as valid as before. New civil partnerships will not be available.

But I don't want to get married. I just want want relationship recognised by the state. The same as if I had been gay...

jobbridge4life

enda1 wrote: »

But I don't want to get married. I just want want relationship recognised b the state. The same as if I had been gay...

Grand go fight for that. It has nothing to do with the referendum at hand.

sydthebeat

enda1 wrote: »

But I don't want to get married. I just want want relationship recognised b the state. The same as if I had been gay...

Wrong thread

seamus

enda1 wrote: »

No I do mean civil partnership.
I have a civil partner who is of the opposite gender. It was conducted in France (a PACS) to allow for the easy provision for joint ownership and sharing of assets in the case of death (we were buying a house in France).

Ireland does not recognise our relationship however, which is bizarre. In it's attempt to bring in equality (back when civil partnerships were brought in) it instead brought in another layer of inequality.

So my relationship will STILL not be recognised after this bill? Had she been a man my relationship would be recognised? All seems very strange.

It seems more like a bit of a niche scenario.

Marriage legislation recognises marriages contracted in a foreign jurisdiction, provided that the nature of the marriage meets the same criteria as here. So a marriage involving siblings overseas would not be a recognised marriage here, and so forth.
With this in mind, same-sex marriages overseas would be recognised as valid in Ireland. However, other arrangements such as civil partnerships would not.

Had your civil partner been a man, your relationship would still not have been recognised.

In effect, your French civil partnership was a private contractual agreement under French Law. While some provisions of that contract would be recognised in an Irish court, it would not be afforded the same legal status as a civil partnership or marriage in Irish law.

In effect, it's a bit like signing an employment contract with a mate in France, then moving the entire business to Ireland and expecting the same contract to be recognised under Irish law.

enda1

sydthebeat wrote: »

Wrong thread

Not really. It seems that if there is a yes vote, the intention is to abolish civil partnerships, thus making the chance for my relationship to be recognised by the state further from reality.

An unintended (perhaps) consequence of the amendment and further legislation.

I would of course still vote yes in the referendum (if I was allowed vote - I no longer reside in Ireland) but I am disappointed that the legislature is not trying to kill two birds with the one stone here and make it all equal.

SireOfSeth

SF12 wrote: »

Do you mean civil marriage? I'm confused by all this. I thought civil partnership was basically to allow non-religious ceremonies, regardless of the sexes involved. But it says on the referendum commission site that only same-sex couples can enter into civil partnerships. Opposite sex couples cannot. So - do you mean a civil marriage? And do civil marriages not already have the same rights as religious marriages?? (for want of a better description)

The more I dig into all of this, the more confused (and dubious) I get.

You know the bit at the end of the religious ceremony, where you sign the marriage register... that is the civil marriage bit. If you did not sign, the marriage is not be recognised by the state (it would only be recognised by the church). If someone gets married at a Registry Office, they will sign the marriage register. That's a civil marriage too.

Homosexual couples are not allowed to have a civil marriage. They are only allowed to have a civil partnership.

Basically, Civil Marriage is greater than Civil Partnership. That is what we are voting on... allowing homosexual couples the same right to civil marriage as their heterosexual counterparts.

C14N

meglome wrote: »

How does a fringe group like the Iona 'Institute' or whatever name they are calling themselves get the large sums of money to place all these ads?

I wonder do they get funding from overseas. Not many wealthy Irish with much of an interest I don't think but plenty of Americans who are, and the Mormons in Utah have previously spent large sums of money on anti-gay marriage campaigns in other states before.

enda1 wrote: »

Not really. It seems that if there is a yes vote, the intention is to abolish civil partnerships, thus making the chance for my relationship to be recognised by the state further from reality.

It's going to be the same distance from reality, really.

PopePalpatine

C14N wrote: »

I wonder do they get funding from overseas. Not many wealthy Irish with much of an interest I don't think but plenty of Americans who are, and the Mormons in Utah have previously spent large sums of money on anti-gay marriage campaigns in other states before.

This should make for enlightening reading.

sydthebeat

enda1 wrote: »

Not really. It seems that if there is a yes vote, the intention is to abolish civil partnerships, thus making the chance for my relationship to be recognised by the state further from reality.

An unintended (perhaps) consequence of the amendment and further legislation.

I would of course still vote yes in the referendum (if I was allowed vote - I no longer reside in Ireland) but I am disappointed that the legislature is not trying to kill two birds with the one stone here and make it all equal.

If your French civil partnership isn't recognised here currently, a yes or no vote isn't going to change that.

If your French civil partnership IS recognised here currently, a yes or no vote isn't going to change that.

Stark

Also if you're in a heterosexual civil partnership, that's not recognised in Ireland and won't be regardless of the referendum outcome. Civil partnership is only for the gheys in Ireland.

enda1

Thanks for clarifying all.

Has there been debate on why they're going to abolish civil partnerships (if there's a yes vote)? Or is it a case of it's assumed no one will want them?

Stark

enda1 wrote: »

Thanks for clarifying all.

Has there been debate on why they're going to abolish civil partnerships (if there's a yes vote)? Or is it a case of it's assumed no one will want them?

Assumed no-one will want them. And I guess if it's going be true "equality" then you can't have two institutions for gay people and one institution for straight people after same sex marriage is introduced.

seamus

Stark wrote: »

Assumed no-one will want them. And I guess if it's going be true "equality" then you can't have two institutions for gay people and one institution for straight people after same sex marriage is introduced.

Yeah, I think this is it. It's basically an acknowledgement that CP is a "poor man's" marriage, and there's no point in keeping CP (and opening it up to hetero couples), when marriage offers the exact same rights, plus a few more.

It's worth noting that while some may like the idea of a "simple" marriage like CP that can be easily dissolved, the same act which brought in CP, effectively brought in "simple" marriage by default for cohabiting couples. So basic property rights and so forth are automatically conferred on cohabiting couples.

The idea was that these protections could be made permanent through marriage for heteros and through CP for homos. If marriage is universally available, CP then becomes redundant.

Stark

seamus wrote: »

It's worth noting that while some may like the idea of a "simple" marriage like CP that can be easily dissolved, the same act which brought in CP, effectively brought in "simple" marriage by default for cohabiting couples. So basic property rights and so forth are automatically conferred on cohabiting couples.

Should also be noted that the same 4 year wait for a divorce in Ireland also applies to civil partnerships.

gravehold

Enda on rte debate won't/cant't answer any of the questions asked. This is why people don't trust the government on this and the yes vote

Ave Sodalis

gravehold wrote: »

Enda on rte debate won't/cant't answer any of the questions asked. This is why people don't trust the government on this and the yes vote

And the no side are able to answer every question put to them honestly and fully.

gravehold

sup_dude wrote: »

And the no side are able to answer every question put to them honestly and fully.

They guy did very well and answered every question posed by the rte guy. Enda mess up and looked like an ass

Hero777

SireOfSeth wrote: »

Basically, Civil Marriage is greater than Civil Partnership. That is what we are voting on... allowing homosexual couples the same right to civil marriage as their heterosexual counterparts.

Can anyone tell me what are the differences btw a civil marrage and a civil partnership? in simple terms?

sydthebeat

Hero777 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what are the differences btw a civil marrage and a civil partnership? in simple terms?

http://www.marriagequality.ie/getinformed/marriage/faqs.html

CramCycle

Hero777 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what are the differences btw a civil marrage and a civil partnership? in simple terms?

The simplest and potentially most important, is that civil marriage is protected by the constitution, civil partnership is not.

There are many more reasons, some legal, some emotive but for me this is the single most important one, as it is the one that enshrines protection and equality in the same manner as is provided to myself at this point in time. The others are all important and depending who you are, and your point of view, these other ones maybe equal, less or more important than the one I have as the most important.

Hero777

CramCycle wrote: »

The simplest and potentially most important, is that civil marriage is protected by the constitution, civil partnership is not.

Apologies if I am sounding ignorant, with reading the above link and manyother sources am I right in the following distinctions? (take that all thebelow will occur if it is a yes vote)

- increased availability to social supports during hardships?

- Legally recognised relationship with children (confused with this one as Iwould have thought that adoption/surrogacy laws would cover it)

- Classified more as a family unit (regardless of children or not) - Againwhat does that mean in layman’s terms

- Divorce would come into effect as well

For me I am on the fence, trying today to get my facts straight prior tovoting.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Hero777 wrote: »

Apologies if I am sounding ignorant, with reading the above link and manyother sources am I right in the following distinctions? (take that all thebelow will occur if it is a yes vote)

- increased availability to social supports during hardships?

- Legally recognised relationship with children (confused with this one as Iwould have thought that adoption/surrogacy laws would cover it)

- Classified more as a family unit (regardless of children or not) - Againwhat does that mean in layman’s terms

- Divorce would come into effect as well

For me I am on the fence, trying today to get my facts straight prior tovoting.

This link has the clearest explanation I can find. Don't worry overly about the spam list of 160 differences.

http://fergryan.blogspot.ie/2015/04/civil-partnership-v-marriage-some.html

SireOfSeth

Hero777 wrote: »

Apologies if I am sounding ignorant, with reading the above link and manyother sources am I right in the following distinctions? (take that all thebelow will occur if it is a yes vote)

- increased availability to social supports during hardships?

- Legally recognised relationship with children (confused with this one as Iwould have thought that adoption/surrogacy laws would cover it)

- Classified more as a family unit (regardless of children or not) - Againwhat does that mean in layman’s terms

- Divorce would come into effect as well

For me I am on the fence, trying today to get my facts straight prior tovoting.

For an unbiased view, you would be best to check out the Referendum Commissions website. Lots of your questions are answered in the "Civil Partnerships, including how they differ from marriages" section...
http://refcom2015.ie/marriage/
Also, some additional information is in the "News" page...
http://refcom2015.ie/news/

Kanhir

Breaks my heart to be a filthy emigrant who can't vote for my own right to get married.

Silly question: When do the results generally come out for these referendums?
(i.e. will there be enough time to have a big gay celebration/commiseration before Eurovision?)

galljga1

Kanhir wrote: »

Breaks my heart to be a filthy emigrant who can't vote for my own right to get married.

Silly question: When do the results generally come out for these referendums?
(i.e. will there be enough time to have a big gay celebration/commiseration before Eurovision?)

Sometime on Saturday. Eurovision parties will be mental.

AlphaRed

galljga1 wrote: »

Sometime on Saturday. Eurovision parties will be mental.

The Eurovision lost all respectability a long time ago

Ave Sodalis

AlphaRed wrote: »

The Eurovision lost all respectability a long time ago

I think this is probably the first post of yours I agree with :pac:

PopePalpatine

Well, if it pisses off a crowd of Russian Orthodox hatebeards and Putin, it can't be all that bad.

Hotblack Desiato

I wonder does Putin have a few lads studying the No campaign, he could pick up a few tips.

ByfocalPhoto

Referring back to my perceived yes leaning media bias, I have listened carefully since.

To be honest the YES bias of the presenters is apparent but I have to admit there has been more than enough NO opinion presented to satisfy the rules.

Someone referred to the NO adverts on YouTube. I have now watched some of those. Most of them are so much hot air but one in particular is very powerful.

It is the one about the guy who running a wedding stuff shop. Invitations etc. He catered for marriages and civil unions and one or two of staff happened to be gay. He shared some space with a lady who made statuettes for cake tops. One of them featured a same sex couple and he dared to express reservations about that. She threatened to go public unless he retracted the viewpoint. He naively called her bluff. She went on line and in fairly short order he was bullied/boycotted out of business. He lost his business. He and his family were subject to dogs abuse.

If I were eligible to vote and if I was on the fence that one ad would tip me into the no camp.

That sort of PC Thought Police / economic terrorism must not be validated.

http://www.thejournal.ie/daintree-same-sex-1107532-Sep2013/

Happyman42

ByfocalPhoto wrote: »

If I were eligible to vote and if I was on the fence that one ad would tip me into the no camp.

Why would it have anything to do with the issue? It's completely separate...we're not voting on whether the woman was a b****x or not.