The same-sex marriage referendum debate

[annapr]

Annapr ,sad to say but I couldn't tolerate any gay family members.I would have to say I would be forced to disown them.Harsh I know but this is my honest view

You're right that is sad.
I'd hazard a guess and say you don't have children?
No one could have that viewpoint if they have felt the unconditional love you have for your kids from being a parent.
I feel sorry for you.

[Oraisteach]

I agree with you, O'Neill.  He is playing, and as regards addressing critiques of his views, I don't think anyone's blinder.

[J70]

Annapr ,sad to say but I couldn't tolerate any gay family members.I would have to say I would be forced to disown them.Harsh I know but this is my honest view

What would you have done if you yourself had been gay?

[Gabriel_Hurl]

Annapr ,sad to say but I couldn't tolerate any gay family members.I would have to say I would be forced to disown them.Harsh I know but this is my honest view

What would you have done if you yourself had been gay?

Dressed in better clothes than Armagh, Spurs and Celtic jerseys

[T Fearon]

What a silly question. I am what I am.

[Oraisteach]

Not a silly question, Tony.  The ability to empathize is essential to being open-minded.  I think of Dick Cheney's swivel on homosexuality when his daughter announced she has gay or GOP Rob Portman switching his view on same-sex marriage when his son came out as gay.  Allow yourself to walk in others' shoes.

[armaghniac]

Not a silly question, Tony.  The ability to empathize is essential to being open-minded.  I think of Dick Cheney's swivel on homosexuality when his daughter announced she has gay or GOP Rob Portman switching his view on same-sex marriage when his son came out as gay.  Allow yourself to walk in others' shoes.

To change your views on behalf of your own family is simple nepotism and illustrates the venality of politicians.

[T Fearon]

I'm afraid there'd be no U turns from me on this issue

[ONeill]

I agree with you, O'Neill.  He is playing, and as regards addressing critiques of his views, I don't think anyone's blinder.

Nah, you and nearly everyone else don't get it.

Anthony, like many in this corner of the planet unfortunately, is answerable to something (ethereal) we cannot begin (or want) to comprehend.

For that reason, and it really is as blind as it sounds, your words fall on totally barren ground. It might read well on your part but if you're wanting to open Anthony's eyes you're better off knitting.

[Eamonnca1]

Aside from the religious perspective I believe gay marriage and the normalisation of unnatural relationships to full equal status with those that are natural, is bad for society.

"Unnatural?" Are you saying that homosexuality does not exist in nature?

[Eamonnca1]

But you can't call churches backward and discriminatory for simply adhering to non negotiable beliefs derived straight from the bible.

Yes you can.

[Eamonnca1]

Not a silly question, Tony.  The ability to empathize is essential to being open-minded.  I think of Dick Cheney's swivel on homosexuality when his daughter announced she has gay or GOP Rob Portman switching his view on same-sex marriage when his son came out as gay.  Allow yourself to walk in others' shoes.

To change your views on behalf of your own family is simple nepotism and illustrates the venality of politicians.

Unconditional love for your children is "nepotism?" I don't think that word means what you think it means.

[J70]

Not a silly question, Tony.  The ability to empathize is essential to being open-minded.  I think of Dick Cheney's swivel on homosexuality when his daughter announced she has gay or GOP Rob Portman switching his view on same-sex marriage when his son came out as gay.  Allow yourself to walk in others' shoes.

To change your views on behalf of your own family is simple nepotism and illustrates the venality of politicians.

Or maybe convictions are easy to hold when it's only someone else's family member that is affected.

Prejudice hurts actual real live human beings, not abstract minorities.

[armaghniac]

To change your views on behalf of your own family is simple nepotism and illustrates the venality of politicians.

Unconditional love for your children is "nepotism?" I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Of course you have to love your children and support them. Nepotism is when you direct public policy to the advantage of our own family, when you wouldn't do it for other people. When you change the tax code because your family have made bad investments, when you change the divorce law because your family have relationship problems and when you undermine marriage because it doesn't suit your family and mates. This is corruption.

Or maybe convictions are easy to hold when it's only someone else's family member that is affected.

Prejudice hurts actual real live human beings, not abstract minorities.

Oh right, so if some of your children turn out to be supporters of families then you'll not be calling them homophobes, that is  only for anonymous people on the Internet?

[Eamonnca1]

Nepotism is when you direct public policy to the advantage of our own family, when you wouldn't do it for other people. ... This is corruption.

So supposing someone opposes marriage equality. Then one of their children comes out as gay. Then they learn that homosexuality is as much an accident of birth as left-handedness. Then they change their minds on marriage equality. That's not "nepotism." That's called changing your mind in the light of having a new understanding.