Same Sex Marriage Referendum Mega Thread Part 2

osarusan

Sam Kade wrote: »

You must be gay or a gobsh1te or both.

joe912 wrote: »

So you are happy to legislate for 5% of the population and deny 40% their say. sounds fair

Pherekydes wrote: »

Nothing like a graceful loser:

https://twitter.com/PaddyJManning/status/602092788516257792

https://twitter.com/PaddyJManning/status/602093531860205568

:pac:

agriman27 wrote: »

Hopefully they can oust Fine Gael in the upcoming elections, before they have any more bright ideas to waste anymore money and resources like this pointless referendum which could have been implemented without a vote.

Rightwing wrote: »

Can't say I was pleased with the result. But the homos are entitled to their day in the sun.

Hahahaha, stuff like this is music to my ears.

Keep it coming!

timetogo

murphm45 wrote: »

My question is though (and it's valid for all referenda) what about the losing side? Again the 49 chickens and 51 foxes example

The no side can keep on living their normal lives with no affect on them at all.
We weren't voting to take away any rights. We were voting to extend rights to gay people. That did seem to confuse some people.

murphm45

Stheno wrote: »

I've been on the losing side in past referenda and it can be hard to accept that something you strongly are against will become law

The government could have chosen to just legislate now they have a mandate from this vote

I don't think its even that they're on the losing side that's upsetting me it's the disgusting comments people are making about them just because they're no voters. They're not bigots or homophobes they just have a different view which some people refuse to even try to understand, but I should stop taking it personally (I think if it was directed at me I'd find it easier to shrug of mind).

Anyway thanks, I think the saturation coverage of this is too much for me to handle (hopefully thing will go back to normal with news reports of government incompetence and crime lightening my mood on a daily basis).

Night every one and enjoy the celebrations!

Not a NSA agent

We had a vote, do we add a line to the constitution that would allow 2 people of the same gender to marry? 62.1% of people said yes. 37.9% said no.

The majority of people said yes, we do add that line. Now the minority group is complaining about not being represented. What exactly would they be represented for? We either add the line or we don't. People voted no for all sorts of reasons from a **** you enda, i dont like the wording, i want to be able to discriminate against gay people, gay people make baby jesus cry and many others. How does this group be represented and what will it achieve? I've asked this multiple times and have yet to get an actual answer.

Try mentioning the tyranny of the majority before Friday and the no side would accuse you of being against democracy, now all of a sudden they have to be protected from....something.

We cant hand out runner up prizes every time we have a vote. In some situations sure but I'm not seeing it here.

Means Of Escape

Gintonious wrote: »

Breda O'Brien on the news, shouldn't she be back under a rock somewhere?

Now there's a women with balls,I mean courage,for standing up for what she believed in despite the pressure .

endacl

CaveCanem wrote: »

But before the referendum Enda said they will take no action on it before the next election, which means it may never happen or Labour kind of like the idea of using women as battery hens.

I said no such thing. The no side were right. From Monday, each first born child must be handed over to a gay couple to raise fabulously as their own. Ye voted to change the world. Deal with the consequences.

Feck. What am I going to do without No voters on these threads to pull the pi55 out of...?

On the other hand, yay equality!

K4t

Means Of Escape wrote: »

Now there's a women with balls,I mean courage,for standing up for what she believed in despite the pressure .

Just like it takes courage to believe in God and a religious doctrine right? As opposed to thinking rationally about the whole thing..

I would hope that any time a person or group stands up for inequality that they will be challenged and their intolerant beliefs repeatedly ridiculed. And no, there is no irony in that statement. All beliefs do not deserve respect, tolerance of intolerance is not tolerance, and equality is a good thing no matter which way Breda and her clan try to spin it.

kunst nugget

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

We had a vote, do we add a line to the constitution that would allow 2 people of the same gender to marry? 62.1% of people said yes. 37.9% said no.

The majority of people said yes, we do add that line. Now the minority group is complaining about not being represented. What exactly would they be represented for? We either add the line or we don't. People voted no for all sorts of reasons from a **** you enda, i dont like the wording, i want to be able to discriminate against gay people, gay people make baby jesus cry and many others. How does this group be represented and what will it achieve? I've asked this multiple times and have yet to get an actual answer.

Try mentioning the tyranny of the majority before Friday and the no side would accuse you of being against democracy, now all of a sudden they have to be protected from....something.

We cant hand out runner up prizes every time we have a vote. In some situations sure but I'm not seeing it here.

Surely the minority are taken care of by the fact that they don't have to marry someone of the same sex if they don't want to and if they are married, their marriage remains unaffected by the changes.

risteard7

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

endacl

kunst nugget wrote: »

Surely the minority are taken care of by the fact that they don't have to marry someone of the same sex if they don't want to and if they are married, their marriage remains unaffected by the changes.

Not really. Lesbian and gay couples will now be recognised as equal under the law. So.... So ..

Feck. You're right.

endacl

risteard7 wrote: »

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

OK. For sh1ts and giggles. What do you base your opinion on?

kunst nugget

risteard7 wrote: »

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

I guess the kind of society that accepts gay people for who they are and empathises enough to be able to extend equal rights to them. I'm proud to be Irish today.

Cold War Kid

risteard7 wrote: »

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

Imagine being gay (something you cannot control) and seeing this sh-t about your relationship over and over. Must get exhausting. What's "morally wrong" about a consenting adult relationship? If it were unnatural, it wouldn't be happening.

Not a NSA agent

kunst nugget wrote: »

Surely the minority are taken care of by the fact that they don't have to marry someone of the same sex if they don't want to and if they are married, their marriage remains unaffected by the changes.

Thats what I would think. I feel like this every time this topic comes up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmivKyEY1Dk

risteard7 wrote: »

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

You're on the internet, the time for caring about what was natural was gone long ago. Don't forget modern medicine.

K4t

risteard7 wrote: »

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

How is marriage unnatural or morally wrong?

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

Not just boards, most people don't like to see it. In fact there was a vote by the entire country today which more than suggested this. You're entitled to your opinion. We live in a more fair and equal society today than we did yesterday. Apologies for the bullying of the 40% - #Justice for the 40% - #JeSuis40%.

endacl

Oh. No response. Just a tool dropping a stupid bomb. As ye were.

Yay equality!

alroley

risteard7 wrote: »

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

I know, there's still homophobic dicks who feel some people should be lower than others and not have equal rights because of something they can't control. There are people who believe two people in love should not have the right to get married. That's really f***ed up

jaymcg91

Who even cares about the haters now? The loving relationship that I have with my boyfriend will now be able to progress and develop in the same way as every other relationship because of this amendment.

As I said in that "Smug" thread, I felt unbelievably proud, honoured and privileged to be able to vote on something so important to me, that will shape the future of my life, and the lives of countless others.

Amazing, historic day that I, and so many other people will never forget. I cried on Friday when the power of the Yes voters became apparent, and the love and support that was shown for gay people by the majority of the country came to the forefront.

I just can't stop smiling.

alroley

Very proud to be Irish today
I did shed a few happy tears earlier

endacl

jaymcg91 wrote: »

Who even cares about the haters now? The loving relationship that I have with my boyfriend will now be able to progress and develop in the same way as every other relationship because of this amendment.

As I said in that "Smug" thread, I felt unbelievably proud, honoured and privileged to be able to vote on something so important to me, that will shape the future of my life, and the lives of countless others.

Amazing, historic day that I, and so many other people will never forget. I cried on Friday when the power of the Yes voters became apparent, and the love and support that was shown for gay people by the majority of the country came to the forefront.

I just can't stop smiling.

Go you.

dxhound2005

Ireland now becomes an outlier in the world. Only about 10% of countries have legislated for same sex marriage. Much of Europe does not provide for it in law.

Which gives the lie to the impression being put about that Ireland was backward and out of step with the rest of the world. In population terms, of the twenty most populated countries in the world only two allow same sex marriage, the USA (part of) and Brazil. So no same sex marriage in China, India, Indonesa, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria , Japan, Mexico, Vietnam, Philippines, Germany and so on.

So is Ireland right joining in this tiny minority, or is most of the rest of the world right in keeping marriage the way it has always been?

alroley

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Ireland now becomes an outlier in the world. Only about 10% of countries have legislated for same sex marriage. Much of Europe does not provide for it in law.

Which gives the lie to the impression being put about that Ireland was backward and out of step with the rest of the world. In population terms, of the twenty most populated countries in the world only two allow same sex marriage, the USA (part of) and Brazil. So no same sex marriage in China, India, Indonesa, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria , Japan, Mexico, Vietnam, Philippines, Germany and so on.

So is Ireland right joining in this tiny minority, or is most of the rest of the world right in keeping marriage the way it has always been?

We are 100% right. There is nothing wrong about equality, and some day the whole world will see that.

The King of Moo

risteard7 wrote: »

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

In what sense is same-sex marriage immoral?

What's the negative result of two people of the same gender getting married that makes it immoral?

And "unnatural:" people are born either heterosexual or homosexual or bisexual, without getting any say in the matter and without any human intervention deciding this, so all states are surely natural.
So what is it that's unnatural about same-sex marriage?

I can't believe I'm asking these questions on the internet, vast repository of knowledge, in 2015.

darkpagandeath

Glad to see the staunch yes people being magnanimous in victory.

Not a NSA agent

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Ireland now becomes an outlier in the world. Only about 10% of countries have legislated for same sex marriage. Much of Europe does not provide for it in law.

Which gives the lie to the impression being put about that Ireland was backward and out of step with the rest of the world. In population terms, of the twenty most populated countries in the world only two allow same sex marriage, the USA (part of) and Brazil. So no same sex marriage in China, India, Indonesa, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria , Japan, Mexico, Vietnam, Philippines, Germany and so on.

So is Ireland right joining in this tiny minority, or is most of the rest of the world right in keeping marriage the way it has always been?

We're probably part of the minority for a lot of things but the middle east, africa and many parts of asia are hardly what we should set as standards.

If you look at a map I would rather following the countries that have it than the ones who dont.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/World_marriage-equality_laws.svg/863px-World_marriage-equality_laws.svg.png

risteard7

risteard7 wrote: »

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

Actually this is after hours. This is the HOME of Anti PC opinions sometimes. Usually however the usurpers of all that is PC tend to have a reason or some basis for their position. You - you however - just seem to have spewed it. So when you wipe your lips perhaps use them to tell us not just THAT it is wrong but WHY it is wrong. We do love a bit of basis around here

efb

Lads silly drunk at 0112

Up since 0700 tallying celebrating and drinkiing

But so blissfully happy!

marienbad

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Glad to see the staunch yes people being magnanimous in victory.

I prefer honesty to hypocrisy . So P*** off Iona and the rest of that mean-spirited shower . Is that magnanimous enough for you ?

endacl

S'funny. Anybody expressing those opinions now fall into the same category as people who profess that...

... women employed by the civil service should leave their job once they get married.

... a woman raped by her husband isn't 'raped'. She is 'rode'

... any individual using contraception is a criminal.

... pubs should close for 'holy hour'.

An interesting perspective. Inequality, at least in this regard, is now a thing of the past. Now we've build up a head of steam, it's time to push for nter gender income inequality, seperation of church and education (unless entirely church funded), and, feck it, why not? Seperation of church and uterus.

endacl

efb wrote: »

Lads silly drunk at 0112

Up since 0700 tallying celebrating and drinkiing

But so blissfully happy!

Buy yourself a drink. If we ever meet I owe you a fiver. Very happy for you.

Feck it. Buy a round. For the table! Not the whole pub!!! :eek: €20 limit!

Cold War Kid

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Glad to see the staunch yes people being magnanimous in victory.

Make sure to throw the same swipe at the spiteful comments by the no people - for balance like.

It's absolutely hilarious the way people are pretending to find an issue with yes voters being happy, and with yes voters being defensive when there's absolute venom towards gay people just being in a loving relationship and able to confer marital status on this.

The King of Moo

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Glad to see the staunch yes people being magnanimous in victory.

It's one thing to refuse to rub No-voters' noses in it unprompted.
But I don't see why we should be overly-respectful to bigots who can't even be bothered to come up with some kind of excuse for their disgust of homosexuality.
I thought the whole "The Yes side are being mean to us by telling us to vote Yes, that's why you should vote No!" rhetoric would've gone away once the referendum was over.

darkpagandeath

Cold War Kid wrote: »

Make sure to throw the same swipe at the spiteful comments by the no people - for balance like.

It's absolutely hilarious the way people are pretending to find an issue with yes voters being happy, and with yes voters being defensive when there's absolute venom towards gay people just being in a loving relationship and able to confer marital status on this.

I did not vote no...

traprunner

risteard7 wrote: »

How can this be considered a 'great day for Ireland?? We are the first country to vote for something that is unnatural morally wrong.

Now i know this is not the PC opinion that boards likes to see but i'm just giving my honest opinion. What kind of a f***ed up society do we live in.

How about another novena? Surely it will cleanse your mind and you can settle with the fact that your opinions count for very little. Equality for gay people is here to stay. The majority have spoken and don't agree with your opinion.

Means Of Escape

With no government or celebrity support and low financial backing the No voters were akin to someone trying to stop a charging rhino with a straw .

Doff

I love my cat. I'm going to push to marry my cat. Who are you to deny love?

traprunner

jaymcg91 wrote: »

Who even cares about the haters now? The loving relationship that I have with my boyfriend will now be able to progress and develop in the same way as every other relationship because of this amendment.

As I said in that "Smug" thread, I felt unbelievably proud, honoured and privileged to be able to vote on something so important to me, that will shape the future of my life, and the lives of countless others.

Amazing, historic day that I, and so many other people will never forget. I cried on Friday when the power of the Yes voters became apparent, and the love and support that was shown for gay people by the majority of the country came to the forefront.

I just can't stop smiling.

Are you planning on proposing soon?

endacl

Doff wrote: »

I love my cat. I'm going to push to marry my cat. Who are you to deny love?

Oh, give it a rest. Or be original. There's nothing more boring at this point.

Irish Aris

endacl wrote: »

Oh, give it a rest. Or be original. There's nothing more boring at this point.

they will never stop, will they?

endacl

Irish Aris wrote: »

they will never stop, will they?

Well... If we let them marry their animal of choice?

dxhound2005

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

We're probably part of the minority for a lot of things but the middle east, africa and many parts of asia are hardly what we should set as standards.

If you look at a map I would rather following the countries that have it than the ones who dont.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/World_marriage-equality_laws.svg/863px-World_marriage-equality_laws.svg.png

Brazil, Argentina and South Africa are hardly beacons of light for human rights. You will note that apart from Norway, Sweden, Denmark, France, Spain and Portugal and part of the UK (and now Ireland) no other countries in Europe allow same sex marriage.

That is a lot of European countries including major populations in Germany, Italy, Poland and Ukraine which do not see the need for it. Most of them have a system of civil parternership, as has places like Australia. But Ireland is now definitely out of step with the rest of the world.

Means Of Escape

Will the Nigerian government change its tune after today's result?

endacl

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Brazil, Argentina and South Africa are hardly beacons of light for human rights. You will note that apart from Norway, Sweden, Denmark, France, Spain and Portugal and part of the UK (and now Ireland) no other countries in Europe allow same sex marriage.

That is a lot of European countries including major populations in Germany, Italy, Poland and Ukraine which do not see the need for it. Most of them have a system of civil parternership, as has places like Australia. But Ireland is now definitely out of step with the rest of the world.

Out of step? Or in the lead?

Ave Sodalis

Irish Aris wrote: »

they will never stop, will they?

They will. As I said, people are really underestimating the power of the concept of normality. Anything that's perceived as normal, is more accepted. Anything abnormal comes against conflict. You get rid of the conflict by making it as normal as possible, which is what this referendum has done. They'll eventually look back and feel silly.

The Black Oil

murphm45 wrote: »

Also, what do people really think would have happened if the no side won? Would the yes side have turned around and said ' majority spoke we will leave accept it and quietly leave' or would some horribly vitriolic and disgusting commented about how the country is full of homophobes and bigoted been lambasted on the country. My gut says the later is infinitely more likely (unfortunately).

Finally, do people really think that this will change peoples attitudes to homosexuals? If someone was an @sshole to you yesterday for being gay they will be tomorrow too (these people didn't have a miraculous conversion just because a referendum was passed). Hopefully over time out this will help to eliminate this, but out won't be instantaneous (sorry to rain on peoples parade)

1. I'm sure the likes of Colm O' Gorman et al would have been sincere in defeat. You'll always get more knee-jerk people on social.Had the No camp won, we'd undoubtedly be hearing about a vote for traditional family values, Irish people have ensured the family is at the cornerstone of the constitution, they were unafraid of being called bigots, not won over by media bias, etc. That's the way the No camp would have spun it through and through, make no mistake. They'd happily send out press releases and columns to this effect. I don't think we would have any real insight into specifics reasons/motivations had this been rejected, though. Not to say, btw, now that the result is settled, we've concrete data on why Yes won.

2. Your second point smacks a bit of 'should we have even bothered with this?' or I might be misreading you. The journey for Ireland's gay people has been a long and difficult one. Intolerance and suspicion has slowly moved to 'ah right, he's gay - big deal(!)'. If today's result takes any feeling of shame from any LGBT people then that's only a good thing. Long term prejudice will take time.

As for participation and turnout, this seems to be a huge problem across Western democracies at the moment. I'd like to see higher turnout across elections and referenda, of course. Apathy is a huge factor, perceived sameness across parties is another.

As I have said elsewhere, I will always defend people's right to vote how they want. It comes down to this. The official No side lost because it had nothing to positive to say. David Quinn's congrats tweet is about the only positive thing they have said during the whole campaign. Seriously. The tone of their campaign was extremely negative. Not to mention some obnoxious lampost posters and literature. They had no cohesive positive message. The core No group can complain about media bias, being denied a voice, media group think, balance, anti-Catholic bigotry and whatever else. Many of these buzzwords are negative and such lazy fallback positions. Stop saying 'I can't speak up because I'll be called a bigot or a homophobe'. If that's all you can articulate, get a better argument or reframe the debate that's less hostile to gays. Stop harping on about the media PC gay agenda. If you're swimming in so many negative talking points you're going to lose.

For Iona in particular the loss is on their head and their own doing. Did they even have professional media advisors? They ran on red herrings and fear. Iona's problem is it has a negative script. It is the same on other issues. It's virtually the only gear it operates in. Iona are not ordinary Catholics. I believe a former Christianity mod on boards summed them up as being 'cultural warriors'. I dislike some of the crap thrown Quinn's way on Twitter. Mock them with Father Ted quotes all day long, by all means, anything else or stuff that's OTT is unnecessary.

Outside of the official No media side, some of the negative letters scattered amongst the pages of The Irish Times were pretty much trolling, imo. I've never used the h-word against anyone who campaigned for No, btw. AFAIK, the No camp didn't have a word to say when Pat Carey and Ursula Halligan came out. A simple tweet with decency might not have made any difference, but they could at least have said respected Pat and Ursula voices and gestures, of finally being able to speak. I'm putting less emphasis on Leo's emergence as he's from a younger generation.

I'm not going to claim everything in the Yes camp was hunky dory. The Twitter machine blew its own trumpet and overestimated its own importance, at times. They said it was not about children, then Mary McAleese said it was about Ireland's gay children, which the No Twitter camp called out over perceived mixed message and yes, liberal intolerance masked as tolerance does exist. David Quinn complained last year or a good while back that the definition of equality is never challenged. I think there was some failure here on both sides. No people said man/woman = equal, man/man, woman/woman not so. imo, this vote was about equality of access and opportunity* to a process the majority of the population already have. May be obvious, but I think Yes side could have made that a little clearer. *Something that didn't seem to register with the main No voices.

Btw, why isn't it defined by a heap of other stuff like living together, getting a mortgage, being a carer for a dying relative and on the negative side we know some marriages are probably defined by spousal or alcohol abuse. Surely marriage is defined by those who live it, not by lobbyists of either persuasion.

Anyway, people voted with their heads and their hearts, including Catholics. Democracy is not without its frustrations.

endacl

Means Of Escape wrote: »

Will the Nigerian government change its tune after today's result?

Will you? Please?

:rolleyes:

risteard7

Cold War Kid wrote: »

Imagine being gay (something you cannot control) and seeing this sh-t about your relationship over and over. Must get exhausting. What's "morally wrong" about a consenting adult relationship? If it were unnatural, it wouldn't be happening.

Of course it's unnatural? A man and a woman were created for each other. We are not made to be with the same sex. How anyone can argue against this is baffling. So two men or women being sexually active is natural??

endacl

Means Of Escape wrote: »

With no government or celebrity support and low financial backing the No voters were akin to someone trying to stop a charging rhino with a straw .

With no credible, logical, coherent, rational argument.

The rest was accurate.

Irish Aris

endacl wrote: »

Well... If we let them marry their animal of choice?

but. . . won't somebody think of the animals? :pac:

The King of Moo

Means Of Escape wrote: »

With no government or celebrity support and low financial backing the No voters were akin to someone trying to stop a charging rhino with a straw .

Yeah, fighting to retain arbitrary inequality must be tough work!
You'd think more high-profile people would see sense and try to continue denying rights to people based solely on their innate sexuality. So unfair of them to decide to support the Yes side.

Though they were probably pressured into it, and of course the No side were silenced, as some supporters constantly told us. Why they couldn't be silenced on any of these threads is a mystery though...