• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

51% back gay marriage - poll


FutureTaoiseach

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
7,992
Website
greatdearleader.blogspot.com
Most back legal recognition for gay couples:

More than eight out of 10 people believe same-sex couples should be given some form of legal recognition, according to a Lansdowne Market Research poll conducted last month.

However, the opinion is more evenly split on the issue of gay marriage, with just over half - 51 per cent - expressing support for such a move and 53 per cent agreeing that excluding gay couples from marriage is unfair.

Support levels for greater legal recognition for gay couples were highest among the poorer sections of the community and lower among the higher- earning respondents.

The poll, commissioned by the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network (Glen), indicates less support for allowing same-sex couples to adopt children - 39 per cent support such a move.

Almost two-thirds of respondents - 64 per cent - said an election candidate's position on gay marriage would not have an effect on their voting intentions while 16 per cent said a candidate who supported gay marriage would be more likely to receive their first preference vote.
The lesson is clear - legislate for gay marriage now. :)
 

Pidge

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
427
FutureTaoiseach said:
The lesson is clear - legislate for gay marriage now. :)
While I agree with the latter, but the former isn't exactly "clear".
 

rkeane

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
109
Let them marry......but obviously not in the normal sense of marriage. I'm all for legal recognition of same sex partners. On a related matter, I wouldn't really approve of same sex couples being allowed to adopt...that would be a strange environment for children.
 

jady88

Active member
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
130
rkeane said:
Let them marry......but obviously not in the normal sense of marriage. I'm all for legal recognition of same sex partners. On a related matter, I wouldn't really approve of same sex couples being allowed to adopt...that would be a strange environment for children.
Whilst i am of the same mind i have to sya that it is crap arguement i mean whose to say interracial adoption is not strange for a child, or single parenthood what about children with very old parents?
 

rkeane

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
109
Would u want to be brought up with 2 mums or 2 dads???? Maybe I'm just not openminded enough...I just can't get my head around that kind of scenario.
 

jady88

Active member
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
130
rkeane said:
Would u want to be brought up with 2 mums or 2 dads???? Maybe I'm just not openminded enough...I just can't get my head around that kind of scenario.
I really don't know but i do know i wouldn't want to be brought up by a single parent or (god forbid) someone over 40!!
The point is that children do not notice these things they just want love, if we have children grow up in these relationships we will find they will have the same opinions of their parents more or less as we do. No one can choose their parents so its a stupid line of reasoning too. Sorri
 

rover

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2006
Messages
69
there were reports today that the government will defer any legislation on civil partnerships/tax status/inheritance etc etc until after the next election.

surprise surprise. never saw that one coming
 

jady88

Active member
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
130
rkeane said:
Maybe I'm just 2 traditional. :roll:
No you just have reservations, always a good thing to have. I oppose gay adoption on the grounds that i believe it is important to assert that adoption is for the childs sake not the parents. A child must always be put into the best home, i don't mean to exclude gay people on that basis i merely mean that adoption handlers are the best to decide not the public or civil rights groups.
 

jimbob86

New member
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
2
I agree. It is shamefully discriminatory to prevent adoption on the basis of orientation or the fact that it would be different for the children. It should be a simple matter of whether they can provide a stable loving home life for the children. And that should be decided by the social worker.
 

Dee Four

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
145
jady88 said:
rkeane said:
Maybe I'm just 2 traditional. :roll:
No you just have reservations, always a good thing to have. I oppose gay adoption on the grounds that i believe it is important to assert that adoption is for the childs sake not the parents. A child must always be put into the best home, i don't mean to exclude gay people on that basis i merely mean that adoption handlers are the best to decide not the public or civil rights groups.
You are aware that sexual orientation is not an issue in adoption cases? Single gay people can adopt children in this country. Now, the heartbreaking thing is that if they are in a long-term relationship where there partner has effectively been a second parent to the child, should anything happen to the legal parent the courts will not recognise the relationship between his/her partner and the child. In such a case the child will have had both its parent taken away from him/her. This is because the couple needs to be married in order to co-adopt a child.
 

The OD

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
11,432
Its still a joke that peoples sexual orientation is even an issue.

It shouldnt be an issue except to people who have little to worry about except their own little hang ups.

When I hear people say -

''ooh, what about the kids being brought up by two 'queers'? What will happen to them and will people be cruel?''

I usually say, they might be, because brian dead people like you say -

''ooh, what about the kids being brought up by two 'queers'? What will happen to them and will people be cruel?''

Any Gay people I know are decent, hardworking, compassionate people who should be allowed to express their love for another human being in the same way as heterosexual couples and would make better parents than some of the genetic deadends I also know who happen to be 'straight'........

But of course people get all offended.

Bet their Gay.......

:wink:
 

jomo

Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
13
rkeane said:
that would be a strange environment for children.
But the the children would find it familiar, growing up. I know many strange parents and their children were just fine. I'm sure my parents seemed to strange to other people too - and I think I'm ok too.

There are many children who grow up with one parent, in circumstances where their parents die while they are very young, who are looked after by grandparents, etc, etc. While two-parent opposite-sex dominates, the actual experience of family life differs for everyone.

Anyway, if two people are looking to raise children, we should be happy. Childcare is expensive and work demanding ... many children now spend more time in creches and school and such places than with their own parents.
 

jomo

Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
13
jimbob86 said:
I agree. It is shamefully discriminatory to prevent adoption on the basis of orientation or the fact that it would be different for the children. It should be a simple matter of whether they can provide a stable loving home life for the children. And that should be decided by the social worker.
This remains discriminatory: heterosexual couples are not subject to such tests by social workers. It's assumed, by virtue of their sexuality, that they will provide a good home. For this discrimination to be taken out of this approach, it would take a social worker to make such a decision for every couple in every maternity hospital.

If we can assume that, by and large, straight couples provide good homes for their children, I think we can assume, by and large, that the homos would do the same. They are, for the most part, law-abiding, tax-paying citizens who do not want to destroy children. That's where the leap of faith needs to be made.
 

jomo

Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
13
Support levels for greater legal recognition for gay couples were highest among the poorer sections of the community and lower among the higher- earning respondents.
Isn't that interesting? Does it suggest that marriage is an institution that protects the interests of the rich? Why are those with more money more reluctant to support it?

Aren't gay people meant to be among the higher earners since they don't have kids to feed? How come they can't influence their high-earning friends?

thought following discussion on prostitution
I wonder of if some of those rich men who don't support gay marriage also avail of cheap or expensive prostitutes. You know some of them must ... o the hypocrisy. :roll:
 

madura

Active member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
266
FutureTaoiseach said:
Most back legal recognition for gay couples:

More than eight out of 10 people believe same-sex couples should be given some form of legal recognition, according to a Lansdowne Market Research poll conducted last month.

However, the opinion is more evenly split on the issue of gay marriage, with just over half - 51 per cent - expressing support for such a move and 53 per cent agreeing that excluding gay couples from marriage is unfair.

Support levels for greater legal recognition for gay couples were highest among the poorer sections of the community and lower among the higher- earning respondents.

The poll, commissioned by the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network (Glen), indicates less support for allowing same-sex couples to adopt children - 39 per cent support such a move.

Almost two-thirds of respondents - 64 per cent - said an election candidate's position on gay marriage would not have an effect on their voting intentions while 16 per cent said a candidate who supported gay marriage would be more likely to receive their first preference vote.
The lesson is clear - legislate for gay marriage now. :)
But if you define "marriage" as including eligibility to adopt a child, then the support is obviously lower than 51%. So where does that leave you? In favour of pushing for the inclusive definition that does not enjoy majority support, or prepared to settle for less (possibly temporarily)?
 

FutureTaoiseach

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
7,992
Website
greatdearleader.blogspot.com
madura said:
FutureTaoiseach said:
Most back legal recognition for gay couples:

More than eight out of 10 people believe same-sex couples should be given some form of legal recognition, according to a Lansdowne Market Research poll conducted last month.

However, the opinion is more evenly split on the issue of gay marriage, with just over half - 51 per cent - expressing support for such a move and 53 per cent agreeing that excluding gay couples from marriage is unfair.

Support levels for greater legal recognition for gay couples were highest among the poorer sections of the community and lower among the higher- earning respondents.

The poll, commissioned by the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network (Glen), indicates less support for allowing same-sex couples to adopt children - 39 per cent support such a move.

Almost two-thirds of respondents - 64 per cent - said an election candidate's position on gay marriage would not have an effect on their voting intentions while 16 per cent said a candidate who supported gay marriage would be more likely to receive their first preference vote.
The lesson is clear - legislate for gay marriage now. :)
But if you define "marriage" as including eligibility to adopt a child, then the support is obviously lower than 51%. So where does that leave you? In favour of pushing for the inclusive definition that does not enjoy majority support, or prepared to settle for less (possibly temporarily)?
Well, I have said before I favour gay marriage being a form which does not necessarily including parental rights because I am unsure of whether psychologically it is good for a child to have 2 fathers or mothers. I have called for research on this question. Never say never, but I want to see research first and pending that, I would err on the side of caution. I think even some gay people like me would hold the view that children need both a male and female influence.
 

Dunny

Active member
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
152
Website
www.donnachamaguire.com
rkeane said:
Let them marry......but obviously not in the normal sense of marriage. I'm all for legal recognition of same sex partners. On a related matter, I wouldn't really approve of same sex couples being allowed to adopt...that would be a strange environment for children.
Show me any evidence that shows that children would grow up any differently?

Also, the prime consideration when it comes to Adoption is the welfare of the child. If 2 adults who happen to be gay can bring up a child in a happy home, then so be it!

Also, there is nothing to stop a single person regardless of orientation from adopting. there for the issue of gay adoption doesnt arise as it would be against equality legislation for the authorities to ask a person in the process of adopting a child "Are you Gay"
 
Top