By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
On Friday Irish Citizens went to the polls to vote by referendum on a constitutional amendment allowing same-sex marriage. If passed Ireland will join nineteen other nation states who have legalized such marriages and will be the first to enact the petition by popular referendum.
The topic of the referendum garnered such strong interest it is expected that a large percentage of Ireland’s 3.2 million registered voters will go to the polls. In fact, reportedly, unexpectedly high numbers returned home at their personal expense to cast votes.
The Yes Vote drew wide support from youth as well as Taoiseach Enda Kenny who urged its passage and cited it would represent a civil rights breakthrough. Much of the impetus to return home was triggered by promises of conservative church leaders and conservative groups voicing their opposition and political activism.
The outcome will be difficult to predict due to the nation’s large Catholic majority which has shown traditional leanings in the past.
Twitter users sympathetic or supportive of the Yes Camp utilized the hashtag #HomeToVote and reportedly sixty-four thousand followers of the tag were either neutral or supportive of allowing gay marriage in Ireland.
The results are to be announced Saturday.
By Darren Smith
Source: CBC News
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
Which post are you referring to Olly? I have a hunch you think old nurse is me, she’s not.
DavidM, Have you been following the sordid details of the much heralded Science Mag study published about gay marriage and the ability to change peoples minds. It turns out to have been a fraud! The NYT did a piece the other day on the Green/LaCouer study that gay marriage advocates took as proof that people, even conservatives, can quickly be persuaded to change their minds and support gay marriage. The data was bogus and Professor Green has disavowed the data and the study provided by his co-author, Michael LaCouer. When the NYT reporter tried to contact LaCouer, he had lawyered up and would not answer questions.
“Once gay marriage is established, it will become mandatory to support it, and the very possibility of political dissent on the issue will be foreclosed.”
http://thefederalist.com/2015/05/20/ireland-look-to-americas-cautionary-tale-on-gay-marriage/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=bdc6bad755-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-bdc6bad755-79248369
Our 1st amendment right of conscience (natural right) will be obliterated by this legislated right redefining marriage. Will those in favor of gay marriage vehemently protect the natural right not to support or endorse it? If your answer is NO then welcome to the dark ages.
Nicely done!
The fact that post is coming from someone that denies inalienable rights exist should come as no surprise. More progress. Isn’t Ireland one of the economic PIGS of the EU? They should be so proud.
This Irish ex-Catholic is happy to see the results and happy to see the waning influence of the world’s most entrenched patriarchy, the Catholic Church.
http://c1.thejournal.ie/media/2015/01/same-sex-2.png
Again, it’s the young folks who are leading the way, same as in the U.S.
“And it has evolved over time as societies mature.”
phillyT,
It all depends on how you define maturity. Our society is as far away from the enlightened generation that founded this country. They understood natural, inalienable rights and had to mature to recognize them. We can put robots on Mars but we have no idea what the true purpose for government is. We are maturing ourselves back to the dark ages and to some that is progress.
Again, nicely done!
Hopefully Ireland will make a smoother transition than the U.S. probably will. Congratulations to Ireland and hoorah for equality!
Swish, Olly for the win! Great comment.
Having the freedom to choose who you want to be your “life partner” is a right we would have in the state of nature and therefore it is a natural right. Wanting to have that relationship formally recognized by the state is not something we would have in the state of nature and is therefore a legislated right. It’s no different than having the natural right to travel and the legislated right to drive. We are literally treating legislated rights as natural rights. When the citizen no longer differentiates natural, inalienable rights from legislated rights then there is nothing standing in the way of the state eliminating all natural rights. What the state can give, the state can take away.
Nicely done!
Although the discussion is getting testy, it is still civil and substantive. The trolls like to sleep in on weekends, and some sleep in every day. Mornings, particularly weekend mornings, are usually the best time to comment here. After midnight, it’s like Vegas casinos! I stop gambling by midnight, too Thunderdome like.
davidm2575, if you think that marriage has always been an institution of anything, then you are woefully lacking in any knowledge of history. The bible describes at least seven different types of marriage, including the forceable marriage of a rape-victim to her rapist. The history of marriage has almost nothing to do with reproduction, and much more to do with property or political considerations. And it has evolved over time as societies mature. We allow old people who are unable to produce children to get married. We allow people who don’t want to have children to get married. Your claims are totally unfounded.
You seem a little too fascinated with what gay people do in the bedroom, as is that is the basis for any relationship. You really spend that much time focused on sex in your life? Why so concerned about what everyone else is doing in their bedrooms?
phillyT wrote: “The history of marriage has almost nothing to do with reproduction, and much more to do with property or political considerations.
You are just spouting more false gay agenda propaganda as a smoke screen.
There are two important elements to the institution of marriage: 1) gender diversity, and 2) reproduction. Both of these are now being stripped from the definition of marriage. If they are taken away from the definition, then the institution has basically been destroyed. Marriage will have to be either re-discovered, or kept in place by a segment of society that is not government. Such will lead to hostility between government and those protecting important institutions like marriage. Ultimately, the segments of society protecting the institution of marriage will out compete the secular societies and the institution of marriage will be restored as new governments are put in place that will rightfully protect it.
If the natural state of man were not such that it took a man and a woman coming together in a bond to reproduce and share the work of raising children, the institution of marriage would have never come to be. The proof of this is that same sex unions have always been with us, but never has an institution been created around same sex unions. That is why they are hijacking the institution that developed around opposite sex unions. Marriage is what civilized society. Those societies that adopted the institution of marriage succeeded over the rest of the tribes and nations of the world. It did this by creating a close family unit that defined new relationships and brought the members of such into close working harmony. Those nations that embraced the institution of marriage surpassed the barbaric tribes of the world that continued in sexual immorality without clear family structure. History has documented that civilized progress accompanied the institution of marriage.
It is notable that the institution of marriage has never been discriminatory against same sex couples. It simply defined that unique and natural bond that exists between male and female and the natural consequence of reproduction that comes about from that connection. In no way has the institution of marriage ever prevented two same sex couples from coming together in a lifetime commitment to each other. Changing the definition of the institution in a weak attempt to include same sex couples will do no good thing. Only evil will come from it. It will encourage more same sex couples to try marriage, but those marriages will fail because the biological equipment and psychology is completely different. You can’t make the legal institution of marriage fit same sex unions because their unions are contrary to nature and different from opposite sex unions. For awhile they will celebrate, but it will not change the despair and dysfunctional nature of same sex unions. It will only lead to hurt and heartache for those who enter it with false expectations of what it will do for them.
The US has seemed more sober the past week or so. I’m half Irish, I get to say that.
Letting people vote on the civil rights of minority groups is a perverse and disgusting notion. I have no doubt that several southern states would still ban interracial marriage, would support re-instituting Jim Crow laws, and would probably criminalize certain religions, in addition to numerous other acts of outright discrimination. If there is but one decent and moral function of the court system it is to protect the rights of minorities.
I sincerely hope Ireland supports this referendum, even though I don’t think human rights should be up for popular vote.
phillyT wrote: “I sincerely hope Ireland supports this referendum, even though I don’t think human rights should be up for popular vote.”
Gay marriage is not a human rights issue. Never before in history have gays expressed interest in marriage. Marriage has always been an institution about the male and female bonding together, resulting in reproduction, the creation of families and the new relationships that come from that, and the property rights that come from that. None of these characteristics apply to a same sex union.
The Gay Marriage issue is about gays seeking societal approval for their sodomy and other deviant sexual practices. It is also about destroying the institution of marriage because marriage is an institution that does not work for their promiscuous lifestyle.
What good is the voting if the courts just come along and force it on society anyway in the name of human civil rights? Homosexuals have made democracy a joke. When lustful sexual immorality becomes the basis for marriage, it is a clear indication that our world has lost its ability to think logically. This is all about emotions winning over rational thought in order to destroy a bedrock of civilized society. Marriage and the family unit no longer have meaning.
Looks like the yes votes are going to win! Amazing victory for equality. Good job, people of Ireland!
It had been polling well in Ireland but there might be enough ex-pats to make the difference one way or the other.
It’s amazing how people are returning to support equality, I wish the best for YES!
Darren,
You are correct. Most of the Irish Catholics vehemently oppose same-sex marriage. However, most of the American Catholics are more tolerant (for lack of better words) of same-sex marriage. Why? What does the New Pope says?
Let’s look at what the Bible says about it:
Old Testament. Leviticus 18:22 ‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.’
New Testament. Romans 1:26-27. ‘Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.’
Good luck to the Yes vote!