Hey Guys! With respect, the Referendum is tomorrow. If somebody has not his/her mind made up by now on which way to vote, it is a sad day for the people of Ireland. The radio/tv media have observed a moratorium since 2.00pm today. I think this Forum should do the same with immediate effect. Let the People decide in the Referenda!
Marriage equality referendum - "rights" to kids etc.
- Thread starter Betsy Og
- Start date
Really? People who believe that ideally children should have a mother and father are bigots (as well as akin to racists). The world has gone mad.
No, but denying that other alternatives can have equal status and even in the numerous circumstances like adoption and fostering where no mother and father is denied is bigoted. Your ideal world construct of 'all being equal' doesn't exist no matter how many times you've posed it. To deny a child access to loving patents on this non-fantasy real world based on the sexuality of the parents is bigoted.
Describing same sex Surrogacy as abhorrent is bigoted.
elacsaplau
Registered User
- Messages
- 892
You may have a point here, Leper. It's kinda clear people have stopped listening to each other and that the no brigade are upping the scaremongering ante in one final desperate and shamefully dishonest effort to resist a better future - when another pillar in the architecture of homophobia will be dismantled.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,596
It is now clear that the emotive posters of the No campaign were a mistake and an easy target for the Yes campaign. I remember when I first saw the posters that my immediate reaction was "ahh, this is the same nutters who where anti-choice and who insisted that marriage should be a life sentence". When I read Gene Kerrigan's article tearing this poster campaign apart I couldn't agree more.
But now, very late in the day, the refcom chairman tells us that the No message as portrayed in those posters was essentially correct. Unbelievable
But now, very late in the day, the refcom chairman tells us that the No message as portrayed in those posters was essentially correct. Unbelievable
Last edited:
elacsaplau
Registered User
- Messages
- 892
It is now clear that the emotive posters of the No campaign were a mistake and an easy target for the Yes campaign. I remember when I first saw the posters that my immediate reaction was "ahh, this is the same idiots who where anti-choice and who insisted that 'marriage should be a life sentence'". When I read Gene Kerrigan's article tearing this poster campaign apart I couldn't agree more.
But now, very late in the day, the refcom chairman tells us that the No message as portrayed in those posters was essentially correct. Unbelievable
Gerry - for this is how I shall remember you in future - seems a better fit that the Duke. This is absolutely scandalous.
Here is the exact wording of what you are referring to - there is nothing new in this. And it wasn't late in the day - these were points of detail which the Chairman answered last week in advance of one of the RTE debates.
You have been really dishonest in all of this. Really really dishonest. Your bias is almost beyond belief!
I'm going to log off now - I'm tired of this absolute crap.
2. If the Marriage Referendum is passed, will it be constitutionally permissible to favour opposite sex married couples over same sex married couples in any laws, regulations, or policy of a statutory agency, governing surrogacy and assisted human reproduction?
There are no specific Constitutional provisions on surrogacy or assisted human reproduction and this referendum does not propose introducing any such provisions.
Surrogacy is not regulated in Ireland at present. Laws have been passed dealing with assisted human reproduction but are not yet in effect.
If legislation was passed which treated same sex married couples and opposite sex married couples differently, and if that legislation was challenged, the Courts would have to decide whether the Constitution permitted such different treatment. The following are relevant considerations:
• If the Marriage Referendum is passed, the Constitution will provide for a single institution of marriage available to couples of the same sex and couples of the opposite sex.
• As well as considering Article 41 as amended in this referendum, the Courts would also have to consider Article 40.1, which provides that all citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law.
• As the referendum envisages only one constitutional status of marriage, any law which treated one type of married couple differently from another would be likely to be very carefully scrutinised by the Courts and the circumstances in which such different treatment could ever be permitted would likely be exceptional.
• Were such different treatment possible, and such laws introduced, they would be upheld only if they did not create invidious or arbitrary discrimination between opposite sex and same sex couples. This means – in practical terms – that the reason for the different treatment would have to be a very good reason, which served a legitimate legislative purpose. The difference in treatment would also have to be relevant to its purpose and both opposite sex and same sex couples would have to be treated fairly. Whether these requirements are satisfied in any given circumstance would depend on the evidence presented.
"Also, because surrogate fathers are typically in undefined parenting roles, they may be less able to enforce rules or convince children to obey them, and some surrogate fathers may resort to physical force or psychological control to demonstrate power over children"
So if the non-biological father does have a defined parenting role, say being the child's father, then that problem should be reduced, right?
If this is such a big issue then why are the people in the yes campaign not out trying to stop men who are not the biological parents of children living with them? Should separated, divorced or widowed mothers not be allowed to form relationships with men? What about women who are not the biological parents of children living with separated, divorced or widowed men? After all, we've all hear Hansel and Gretel, not to mention Sleeping Beauty. Dem birds in those books are bleedin' nuts!
No, people should be allowed to marry just the once. They should be forced to stay together, even if they are beating lumps out of each other or one is mad or a raving alcoholic, as that's what's best for the children. If one died or just buggers off the other should not be allowed to re-marry (obviously nobody who is not married should be allowed to have children) just in case their new husband or wife abuses or beats or kills the kids (or, obviously again, leads them into the forest to die or treats them as a maid to their new step sisters).
Last edited:
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.....
You dont think the No side have been totally dishonest as they clutter the airwaves with nonsense and scaremongering!
To all the Yes voters on this thread - I thank you for supporting my equality. There has been such a positive vibe around this country in the last while, that I feel sorry for the No supporters. And hopefully they will realise that the world will continue on as normal for the majority of the population. But a small minority will finally be allowed to be equal in law.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,596
PaddyPower going 25 to 1 ON a Yes result.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,596
My two sons intended to vote Yes and me and the duchess No so in order to help save the planet we agreed not to drive to the polling station and we tore up our polling cards.
Last edited:
Surprised no-one has posted already. Delighted with the result, a great day for Ireland, well done to all. Lots of gushing stuff on the radio historic/beacon yadda yadda, sure nice to listen to but I wouldnt be getting too carried away either. Have to admit I found myself a little emotional listening to people saying what it meant to them - and this is someone with no direct or indirect personal stake in the outcome.
Now that this issue has been resolved, if there really is such a gap in law about surrogacy and all the other bogeyman issues, then hopefully this government or the next will deal with it - hope it doesnt require a referendum tbh, can you imagine the level of guff we'd have to wade through.
I think its a pity the Irish song didnt get through to Eurovision (not that give a hang about the competition), but it would have been interesting to see if Ireland would have gotten a 'bounce' for the day thats in it - since many commentators think it is now a camp festival/TV event. I see my original post was more or less right, at least its all over now....phew!
Now that this issue has been resolved, if there really is such a gap in law about surrogacy and all the other bogeyman issues, then hopefully this government or the next will deal with it - hope it doesnt require a referendum tbh, can you imagine the level of guff we'd have to wade through.
I think its a pity the Irish song didnt get through to Eurovision (not that give a hang about the competition), but it would have been interesting to see if Ireland would have gotten a 'bounce' for the day thats in it - since many commentators think it is now a camp festival/TV event. I see my original post was more or less right, at least its all over now....phew!
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,596
When it came to the bit I am glad it was passed. A No would have been an awful kick in the teeth to a minority. Another good corollary is that the RC church has been demonstrated to have absolutely no moral authority in Irish society any more. I hear on the radio the No side being bad losers, claiming the outcome is a result of a decade of scheming, financed by dark forces.
Nonetheless, I would like to see similar constitutional protection against commercial surrogacy.
I would like to throw my lot in with Purple and congratulate Sol on his posts on the subject of marriage for homosexuals. He was not pressganged onto the forum. He had nothing to gain and must have felt pressure occasionally from some of the posts. [But, if you contribute to a forum such as this, you must expect that everybody will not agree with you].
We live in a democracy where people live and let live. Dreadful wrongs have been done to our Gay Community in the past. Perhaps they can live in more peace now?
We live in a democracy where people live and let live. Dreadful wrongs have been done to our Gay Community in the past. Perhaps they can live in more peace now?
Gerry Canning
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,504
Thanks be to God (now you athiests keep quiet and don,t argue about a God) the Referendum is over.
............................................................................................
I know there have been some heavy recriminations,posturing and implausible positioning during the campaign , but on balance it was great to see things as reasonable as they were.
It was great to see a decisive result and even better to see a high turnout. The People have genuinely decided.
On a flippant note (forgive me ) the closet Yeses came out!
............................................................................................
I know there have been some heavy recriminations,posturing and implausible positioning during the campaign , but on balance it was great to see things as reasonable as they were.
It was great to see a decisive result and even better to see a high turnout. The People have genuinely decided.
On a flippant note (forgive me ) the closet Yeses came out!