The same-sex marriage referendum debate

[AZOffaly]

In fairness I do know where he is coming from. Anyone who says they are voting No is instantly shot down in flames. I'd say the internet would break if someone on Facebook started posting Memes about voting No.

There's no doubt that the establishment were worse when they had the power to be, but it's a bit sad they way the chic agendas have their own too school for cool brigade to sneer at anyone that's not comfortable with what they are proposing.

[Ulick]

The referendum is a sideshow, a distraction. The gov has thrown a stick and the population has gone bounding after it. Why was there not a referendum on the new taxes and permanent austerity? Why are we not consulted on stuff that matters.
Same sex couples have equal rights. Indeed, should there be an additional referendum following this for mixed sex couples to have civil partnerships plus marriage to make it equal?
Am I the only one who notices an air of intolerance to "No" voters? In my view society has become intolerant to dissent in general.

You're not and I'm sorely tempted to vote 'No' because of it.

[deiseach]

Oh, I have no doubt many a reasonable person will be put off by the attitude of the Yes campaign. The self-righteousness of that stunt outside Pearse St Garda station would make you sick. But there wasn't ever a time where they didn't engage in their we're-the-laughing-stock-of-Europe claptrap. The difference now is the liberal/progressive/permissive (takes your pick) agenda tends to win, so we get the whining from the other side that they're the ones being oppressed. I genuinely don't know which is worse.

[Ulick]

Certainly a valid perspective on things

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/head-to-head-a-daughter-of-a-lesbian-mother-argues-against-same-sex-marriage-1.2186608

[armaghniac]

I will vote Yes because at the moment, despite the civil partnership agreements etc, a child in a gay couple's family (either the biological child of one partner, or the adopted child of one partner (gay couples cannot adopt as a 'couple') is only legally bound to that partner. In the event of that partner absconding, or dying, the other partner legally has no right to the child.

This is wrong, and is the main reason for me voting yes.

As different situations arise where people who are not married have children, this is properly the domain of other legislation, not the changing of marriage.  The definition of marriage need not be extended to every combination of people who raise children, expecially as fiddling around with marriage would weaken support for a much larger number of children.

In any case, did the recent Children and Family Relationships Act 2015 not change this?
"...provides that a step-parent, civil partner or cohabiting partner (of three years or more) will be able to apply to court to become the child's guardian if they have had shared responsibility for the day-to-day care of the child for over two years"

[Maguire01]

The referendum is a sideshow, a distraction. The gov has thrown a stick and the population has gone bounding after it. Why was there not a referendum on the new taxes and permanent austerity? Why are we not consulted on stuff that matters.

There is a referendum because this requires a change to the constitution. The others don't. So we elect politicians to take those decisions. It's called democracy. It can be very inconvenient.

And this particular issue may not matter to you, but it's very important to a lot of people.

[The Iceman]

Certainly a valid perspective on things

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/head-to-head-a-daughter-of-a-lesbian-mother-argues-against-same-sex-marriage-1.2186608

Will be explained away as one person's opinion. Not valid..Nothing to see here except a woman grinding an axe.... funny how tolerance is so one sided in this discussion..

[Oraisteach]

Iceman, it is valid, but, as you acknowledge, it IS one person's opinion.  To be persuaded, I would like to read a whole range of opinions of children raised by same-sex couples.  It's the old one snowflake doesn't make a blizzard syndrome, but I'll grant that it's a compelling read.  By the same token, I've also read some very sad stories by children who were raised by neglectful or even abusive heterosexual couples. 

[Maguire01]

Certainly a valid perspective on things

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/head-to-head-a-daughter-of-a-lesbian-mother-argues-against-same-sex-marriage-1.2186608

Will be explained away as one person's opinion. Not valid..Nothing to see here except a woman grinding an axe.... funny how tolerance is so one sided in this discussion..

Well it IS only one person's opinion, but that doesn't mean it's not valid.

But my understanding is that gay couples being able to adopt has nothing to do with this referendum. In that case, bringing the issue of children into this debate is a red herring, is it not?

I also don't recall the fuss with single people being allowed to adopt, with the child clearly being denied a mother or a father in those circumstances. People only seemed to get exercised when it was two men or two women.

[armaghniac]

Iceman, it is valid, but, as you acknowledge, it IS one person's opinion.  To be persuaded, I would like to read a whole range of opinions of children raised by same-sex couples.  It's the old one snowflake doesn't make a blizzard syndrome, but I'll grant that it's a compelling read.  By the same token, I've also read some very sad stories by children who were raised by neglectful or even abusive heterosexual couples.

There are always cases, although no doubt a certain proportion of same sex couples will breakup, become alcoholics etc and compromise children accordingly as heterosexual couples do. The point is that here the same politicians who are arguing for quotas to ensure gender balance in politics are also campaigning to remove gender balance in marriage.

01
But my understanding is that gay couples being able to adopt has nothing to do with this referendum. In that case, bringing the issue of children into this debate is a red herring, is it not?

Adoption is only one aspect of it. Marriage is a legally privileged arrangement designed to provide a stable father and mother relationship for children, positive encouragement for a good arrangement, and that is the point of this example.

[The Iceman]

"We should not point to the existence of broken homes and use it as justification to create more broken homes."

I thought this was a very good point she made. But to your point Maguire adoption is not on the table here, just Marriage. However certainly worth taking in to account and nice to have another side to the story. This woman was a huge gay-activist. All for Marriage equality. She didn't change her mind until she experienced the truth of a normal, natural family and then the full weight of what she lost as a child hit her. I found it very compelling.

A similar story my Wife shared with me this week:
http://www.womenofgrace.com/blog/?p=38363#more-38363
Just another snowflake...

[Maguire01]

But to your point Maguire adoption is not on the table here, just Marriage.

Yes, so all stories of children being denied a mother or father, or whether a gay couple can provide an upbringing as well as a straight couple are totally irrelevant here. They're being use, either deliberately or through ignorance of what the referendum is about, as an argument against gay people being allowed to marry.

[armaghniac]

But to your point Maguire adoption is not on the table here, just Marriage.

Yes, so all stories of children being denied a mother or father, or whether a gay couple can provide an upbringing as well as a straight couple are totally irrelevant here. They're being use, either deliberately or through ignorance of what the referendum is about, as an argument against gay people being allowed to marry.

I think it is fairly clear who is deliberately ignoring things. The question is whether an institution supported by society because of its role in nurturing children and encouraging men and women come together to have and nurture those children, should be extended to a union not involving both men and women.  Clearly, it shouldn't, in any society that hadn't become captive to interest groups.

[thebigfella]

The referendum is a sideshow, a distraction. The gov has thrown a stick and the population has gone bounding after it. Why was there not a referendum on the new taxes and permanent austerity? Why are we not consulted on stuff that matters.
Same sex couples have equal rights. Indeed, should there be an additional referendum following this for mixed sex couples to have civil partnerships plus marriage to make it equal?
Am I the only one who notices an air of intolerance to "No" voters? In my view society has become intolerant to dissent in general.

You're not and I'm sorely tempted to vote 'No' because of it.

do you have a vote being british and all that?

[ballinaman]

The referendum is a sideshow, a distraction. The gov has thrown a stick and the population has gone bounding after it. Why was there not a referendum on the new taxes and permanent austerity? Why are we not consulted on stuff that matters.
Same sex couples have equal rights. Indeed, should there be an additional referendum following this for mixed sex couples to have civil partnerships plus marriage to make it equal?
Am I the only one who notices an air of intolerance to "No" voters? In my view society has become intolerant to dissent in general.

You're not and I'm sorely tempted to vote 'No' because of it.

http://www.joe.ie/news/video-masked-duo-filmed-removing-no-posters-in-dublin/493412