The same-sex marriage referendum debate

[LCohen]

I am saying that a substantial majority of Northern Catholics would vote No in any Gay marriage referendum

Hinges on your definition of "catholic".

I would wager that an overwhelming majority of people from a catholic/nationalist/republican background would vote in favour of marriage equality given the chance. The same applies to those from a protestant/unionist/loyalist background. It reaaly depends on whether they can be bothered voting. As it happens this is an issue that seems to get the under 40s on to the polling register and out on polling day itself.

[LCohen]

Bryson is right for once.The referendum result will make Protestant resistance in the North to a United Ireland even more stronger and will also reduce its appeal to many sincere Catholics.With the SDLP and SF vote in decline,never has the time been more opportune for a unionist party to reach out to Northern Catholics,and cement partition for all time.

The Prince of Wales showed more respect to the Catholic Church and faith in Ireland this week than the average 26 county citizen does.

Maybe the result will trigger an increase in respect FOR the average 26 county citizen BY the Catholic Church. That would be a very good thing

[LCohen]

Seriously.Where else in the world would you get people flying "home" to vote when the outcome won't even effect them as they won't be living here anyway! 

Maybe in the future they would love to come back to a country that was different to the one they left. Maybe one that challenges the view from the pulpit rather than takes instruction from the pulpit represents a great leap forward and people who loved the country wanted to be part of that. A fantastic day for Ireland

[LCohen]

Like them or loathe them you have to admire the DUP for remaining unwavering in their beliefs in spite of vile abuse.It is time for the Catholic Church to adopt a similarly robust approach,and defend what's ordained to be right by Divine Scripture.A useful start would be to excommunicate any so called priest who admits to having voted Yes.

Meanwhile Easy tiger adopts the fatally flawed opt out approach of his conscience (totally illogical and stupid) of voting Yes and attending a First Communion service.I'll let you into a secret mate,you cannot cherry pick according to your conscience.Scripture,not the Church,Pope etc is the supreme authority.

Finally some sense from Tony. Tony is correct. The cherry picking has to stop. That is why Tony is not only against gay marriage but mixed fabric clothes, 2 crops growing in the same field, sex between a man and woman during the woman period of menstrual uncleanliness, working on the sabbath, eating shellfish, approaching the alter with less than perfect eyesight or cutting the hair around the temples of ones' head. Tony is not only against these behaviours for himself but is against them for everyone else and advocates the biblically sanctioned punishments for each of these crimes against god. This includes the murder of the perpetrators. This is because Tony does not cherrypick and is logical and consistent in his views.

[T Fearon]

Five posts when one would have sufficed?

[LCohen]

And what was all the celebrations about (akin to welcoming the football team home from another failed World Cup Finals campaign) on the streets of Dublin yesterday? Like it's hardly that the LGBT community have been oppressed,driven underground,or wrongly incarcerated like the Guildford four.Utter embarrassment these pictures beaming across the globe,and if the result had been No there would have been a rerun in 6 months time for a Yes.

There were some quite embarrassing scenes throughout the whole thing. Thankfully it all sorted itself in the end.

[LCohen]

Five posts when one would have sufficed?

Point being?

[LCohen]

I stand by every word, especially two men adopting a child, whats your point, let them marry, let them have the same rights as the rest, what they do is NOT normal in my opinion, and you would shit a brick if your son brought Barry home as his partner but you would never admit it here, deep down though you know it is true.  Am I homophobic - no but I do have opinions, tell  this if anyone questions any facet of black culture are they racist?  Is no one allowed to have an opinion anymore without being branded by keyboard warriors like yourself who probably types one thing and thinks another, you keep suppressing them thoughts!!

No but if they argued for people to be denied equality based upon the colour of their skin then yes they would be labelled racist. Its a basic point

[T Fearon]

Point being that you could have condensed your flawed  points into one post

[topcuppla]

I stand by every word, especially two men adopting a child, whats your point, let them marry, let them have the same rights as the rest, what they do is NOT normal in my opinion, and you would shit a brick if your son brought Barry home as his partner but you would never admit it here, deep down though you know it is true.  Am I homophobic - no but I do have opinions, tell  this if anyone questions any facet of black culture are they racist?  Is no one allowed to have an opinion anymore without being branded by keyboard warriors like yourself who probably types one thing and thinks another, you keep suppressing them thoughts!!

No but if they argued for people to be denied equality based upon the colour of their skin then yes they would be labelled racist. Its a basic point

But you don't agree with muppet that people could vote no and not be homophobic?

[LCohen]

Point being that you could have condensed your flawed  points into one post

Ahem, the 5 posts were all replies to your 5 posts. Surely the same logic would apply to your good self?

[LCohen]

I stand by every word, especially two men adopting a child, whats your point, let them marry, let them have the same rights as the rest, what they do is NOT normal in my opinion, and you would shit a brick if your son brought Barry home as his partner but you would never admit it here, deep down though you know it is true.  Am I homophobic - no but I do have opinions, tell  this if anyone questions any facet of black culture are they racist?  Is no one allowed to have an opinion anymore without being branded by keyboard warriors like yourself who probably types one thing and thinks another, you keep suppressing them thoughts!!

No but if they argued for people to be denied equality based upon the colour of their skin then yes they would be labelled racist. Its a basic point

But you don't agree with muppet that people could vote no and not be homophobic?

I would not know why someone would have voted no. But of the reasons that were voiced on this forum for voting No I did not see a single one that was not homophobic.

[topcuppla]

Other than the Church mantra, it is hard to see any reason to vote No that don't involve prejudice to some degree.

And given the intolerance to the church on this board or anyone who supports the church, that pretty much classifies everyone who voted no as homophobic, but it is ok to insult, berate and lambaste a religious institution and those who support as long as everyone is supporting gay rights and patting themselves on the back for being tolerant and forward thinking, you seriously couldn't make the hypocrisy on this board up!

I apologise, I can see now that english isn't your first language.

'hard to see any reason to vote No that don't involve prejudice to some degree'  = 'pretty much classifies everyone who voted no as homophobic'



But as imtommygunn pointed out above, your views are completely homophobic. Stop trying to hide behind the rest of the decent NO voters and just admit it.

If the prejudice you allure to isn't the well played card of homophobia what is it?

The phrase was 'prejudice to some degree'.

There are homophobes.
There are those who are quite uncomfortable with homosexuality, but might prefer not to show it.
There are those that are comfortable with homosexuality as long as it isn't in your face.
There are those who have no issues with any aspect of homosexuality whatsoever.

There is 4 different examples of degrees of prejudice, off the top of my head. Different posters will see themselves in one or two of the above, or maybe feel there should be more categories. Maybe many more categories. Other than the first category, I think most people can empathise with the different levels of tolerance. In fact, with education or life experience or whatever, people can move from one category to another over time.

Muppet outlines two examples when trying to justify - Other than the Church mantra, it is hard to see any reason to vote No that don't involve prejudice to some degree. Are you saying muppet or others are homophobic if they voted no with those opinions?

[LCohen]

Other than the Church mantra, it is hard to see any reason to vote No that don't involve prejudice to some degree.

And given the intolerance to the church on this board or anyone who supports the church, that pretty much classifies everyone who voted no as homophobic, but it is ok to insult, berate and lambaste a religious institution and those who support as long as everyone is supporting gay rights and patting themselves on the back for being tolerant and forward thinking, you seriously couldn't make the hypocrisy on this board up!

I apologise, I can see now that english isn't your first language.

'hard to see any reason to vote No that don't involve prejudice to some degree'  = 'pretty much classifies everyone who voted no as homophobic'



But as imtommygunn pointed out above, your views are completely homophobic. Stop trying to hide behind the rest of the decent NO voters and just admit it.

If the prejudice you allure to isn't the well played card of homophobia what is it?

The phrase was 'prejudice to some degree'.

There are homophobes.
There are those who are quite uncomfortable with homosexuality, but might prefer not to show it.
There are those that are comfortable with homosexuality as long as it isn't in your face.
There are those who have no issues with any aspect of homosexuality whatsoever.

There is 4 different examples of degrees of prejudice, off the top of my head. Different posters will see themselves in one or two of the above, or maybe feel there should be more categories. Maybe many more categories. Other than the first category, I think most people can empathise with the different levels of tolerance. In fact, with education or life experience or whatever, people can move from one category to another over time.

Muppet outlines two examples when trying to justify - Other than the Church mantra, it is hard to see any reason to vote No that don't involve prejudice to some degree. Are you saying muppet or others are homophobic if they voted no with those opinions?

I'm not taking the piss but could you please outline what your question is and I will attempt to answer it

[topcuppla]

Muppet doesn't believe everyone who votes no is homophobic, whereas you do - he mentions scenarios where he believes this is the case.

There are those who are quite uncomfortable with homosexuality, but might prefer not to show it.
There are those that are comfortable with homosexuality as long as it isn't in your face.

Would you concur?