Ross writes:
Ad printed in the Dundalk Argus is causing a bit of a stir on social media locally. Most people are pretty shocked with the bluntness of the message, prior to this there has been no sign of a no campaign in Dundalk that I’ve seen, can’t even recall seeing a No poster. Up until now it’s all been really positive stuff from the Yes side.
Alan Daly adds:
It’s also in the Meath Chronicle and the Anglo Celt….
Sponsored Link
I’m hoping for more of this. The No camp destroying themselves.
+++++1
jaysus the paranoia of the No campaign is getting ridiculous
Ive a few hours drive on the day of the referendum to get to the polling station, but will be putting the foot down to get my vote in. How shameful would it be if the “no side” won. What Id be afraid of is that anyone who is leaning towards “no” for marriage equality will feel strongly about it (generally, discrimination brings up strong emotions) whereas the vast majority of people (id imagine) who would vote yes would be apathetic about it given the perceived huge yes support. Get out and vote people, lets show we are a mature, open minded nation where equal means equal!!
Speeding kills, drive safely
Wow. Although who is the shamer supposed to be?
all on the yes side, i guess.
They haven’t seen the irony in that I guess
They haven’t seen the irony in that I guess
But it’s the ‘no’ side who have done this in the past, done the shaming.
It’s a ‘no’ hand as far as I am concerned. There’s no logic to a ‘yes’ voter doing it, none.
I was reading a study about the outcomes of kids of gay couples. They are only worse where the kids feel they are being judged for having two dads/mums, something that I doubt is included in anything Iona puts out based on them.
Precisely !
Ger Brennan
I think it’s that no gay person would ever dress a child like that.
well, that’s the lowest i’ve seen yet from the no side. unless anyone knows of the yes side accusing children of being homophobic?
That’s right. The child is homophobic for wanting a mother and a father.
13th May…..the approx date when the referendum was finally lost by the Yes side.
It’s all going wrong for the smug Yes side. It’s the gay couples who just want to get married I feel sorry for. bandwagon jumpers have run an awful campaign.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/referendum/dublin-football-star-ger-brennan-why-im-voting-no-31217917.html
Well that’s it people … Let’s pack up and go home. IT IS LOST!!!
One Dublin GAA player has said he is voting no (for reasons completely unrelated to the referendum by the by). If only all the major political parties, the law society , countless figureheads, celebrities, trusted and respected children’s charities, the Gaelic Players Association and the Women’s Gaelic Players Association (and many many more influencers) would come out in support of a yes vote to counter the arguments of this brave lone soldier…. WHAT ARE WE TO DO!!!!! Oh yes the tide has turned!!!
(You sir …are an idiot!!)
“It’s the gay couples who just want to get married I feel sorry for. bandwagon jumpers have run an awful campaign.”
Applies to the lies the No side, yes?
If the only reason you vote no is because a minority (in your opinion) have ran a negative campaign,you are a moron..
There is no but..
Personally, if you vote no you are a moron..
The most important thing about that child is that it’s fictional. I don’t know of any kids from gay parents who think this. You expect more of them really, since they do exist, and it’s allegedly such a terrible life for them.
Can we get a picture of the advert in its entirety please.
This image is useless in fairness without the entire ad being visible.
For your delectation and/or revulsion:
http://talkofthetown.ie/2015/05/13/argus-under-fire-for-publishing-controversial-no-campaign-advert/
Thanks… I’ve posted my revulsion to the Dundalk Argus, Meath Chronicle and Anglo Celt FB pages.
https://imgur.com/6Jv2gD9
there are posters like that up around Stephens green this morning don’t think they where there yesterday
Can just make out the address on the bottom of the ad. Sir John Rogersons Quay. That’s were ‘Mothers and Fathers Matter’ are based.
Typical of kids these days….. I want, I want, I want.
I blame the parents.
It’s the gays who are clearly at fault here
If we want to get blunt, how about a ‘Yes’ poster campaign, with a picture of a gay couple and a priest, and the question “Which is more likely to rape little boys?”
What a ridiculous comment! Are you insinuating that gay men are likely to rape little boys however priests are more likely?! Disgusting.
Don’t put words in my mouth, Ronán.
I guess you are not aware of the ‘studies’ that Iona constantly refer to, that tell us that gay couples abuse children.
Just because I don’t agree with Iona is no reason to not listen to what they are saying…
I’d prefer one with the ISPCC and Catholic church logos and the tagline: Who do you trust on children’s rights?
Sounds like Paddy Power’s next ad campaign
Can’t breathe :_D
This is fair enough. The entire Yes campaign has been “done deal – if you don’t agree you should be ashamed of yourself”. There are a lot of people out there with legitimate reservations who feel they are being beaten into submission. The irony is that there is very little equality in this debate on equality. Come on – abuse me for my opinion so….
Honestly, I’ve yet to hear a legitimate reservation. I’d be delighted to hear one all the same.
oh dear. The reasons are legitimate to THEM. Don’t you see? – The fact you don’t agree with them isn’t the point. I said 3 weeks ago that a yes campaign should be explaining to potential No voters why they should vote yes, alleviating any fears they may have rather than just painting rainbows on everything and telling people they are either YES or SCUM. The yes side didn’t really do that very well on Prime Time debate on Monday, for instance.
Coveney was killed answering all of Mullen’s lies. Absolutely killed. And there are literally hundreds of people canvassing throughout Ireland doing exactly what you’ve just suggested there.
The no side are spreading all these red herrings on purpose, so that we spend our time reassuring fears that they have manufactured in order to get a yes vote. Personally I don’t think people are that easily fooled. I think most people who will be fooled by it are already looking for an excuse to vote no so they don’t have to closely examine why they want to vote no. It’s very hard to admit to yourself that you’re prejudiced but we all are to some degree. I don’t think it makes you a bad person because we are influenced by the society we are raised in. But it’s acting according to those prejudices that makes you a bigot.
so the no side can pass off lies as fact, build the most ridiculous strawmen and yet receive no criticism from you? you just don’t like the way the yes campaign does its business? fine – go and vote no if you want, try and justify it any way you want but you’ll still be in the wrong.
Ger Brenan has a few to be fair:
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/referendum/dublin-football-star-ger-brennan-why-im-voting-no-31217917.html
I know, I know. None of these are legitimate because you don’t agree with them.
No, they’re illegitimate because they’re factually, demonstrably, provably incorrect. This isn’t a matter of opinion, it’s fact.
If I say the sky is green it’s not a legitimate opinion, it’s objectively incorrect. Facts are not subject to our opinions. They either are facts or they aren’t.
That’s nonsense.
It’s undeniable that the proposed constitutional change affects the constitutional standing of the family. It’s the section on the family!!
This may be a great thing…..but at least admit it.
How can it news when the family isn’t defined? How can you be against something changing when you aren’t sure what the thing being changed even is?
No, they are illegitimate because they are based on a flawed understanding of the constitution
“All legislation is derived from the Constitution and its principles. So it seems pretty clear that if we redefine marriage and the family by making marriage genderless we will be denying that there is any special value in a child having both a mother and a father.”
Nope. The constitution doesn’t define marriage or family. The proposed change makes no mention of the value of having any type of parent.
“We will be denying that children have any kind of a legal right to a mother and father where possible, like when it comes to laws relating to adoption and surrogacy.”
Nope – also conveniently ignores whether have a kid without a family is better than having a kid who is adopted by two loving men/women. Also, the wording of the referendum is not about adoption or surrogacy. If you have concerns about that law, talk to that law.
“The Universal Declaration on Human Rights proclaims that everybody is equal in dignity and it holds that marriage is a male-female union. ”
Nope, it does no such thing.
Firstly let me say I will be voting yes. Like every debate there are 2 sides to the argument. The No campaigners are perfectly entitled to their views and beliefs. I may not agree with their sentiments , opinions or the methods they use to get across those opinions but they are entitled to hold them and to express them, just as campaigners on the yes side are as well. Suck it up. We live in a democracy and we are having a referendum on the matter. The outcome will be decided by the majority.
It will be decided by the majority but will only have an effect on a minority. What a cruel system don’t you think? Your status as a citizen being decided upon by people who are more interested in allowing people to have opinions than rights.
It’s a pretty great system actually.
its a great system – one may argue that it affects an minority but we all live in a society and the rules effect us all.
Also it’s a change to our constitution which is fairly important,.
James , what would you suggest as an alternative , the system we have may not be perfect but it is the best there is
It’s pretty easy to state that it’s a great system, and yes it is a good system but not great. I like it well enough but there is room for improvement. Lying, making up your own facts, demands that things be debated which are nothing to do with the referendum should all be knocked on the head. That’s a problem with politics in general, with every Republic I suppose. I think democracy is great but the ability to lie in referendum campaigns with impunity is, in my opinion, verging on treason. The Constitution is too serious to allow that kind of nonsense.
Just because they’re entitled to their views and beliefs doesn’t mean everyone else has to ignore how offensive and harmful those beliefs are and it doesn’t put their views beyond criticism.
I do not find their comments necessarily offensive , but I ma sure they find the idea of marriage for everyone just as offensive as you find there comments.
Love a bit of false equivalence, cheers.
Opinions are subjective and open to be criticized. The shittier the opinion, the bigger the criticism.
^ This. Of course you are offended, its the NO side, you are on the YES. Thickos.
They’re entitled to their opinions. We’re entitled to point out when their opinions are factually incorrect. We’re also entitled to our opinions on their opinions. And yet instead of “sucking it up”, loads of people are either describing the Yes side as bullies or, as you’re doing here, posting passive-aggressive nonsense about everyone having a right to an opinion. No one is disputing that; we’re disputing whether specific opinions are well-argued, reasoned or analysed, or based on a sound factual basis.
Dundalk Argus is an INM newspaper… Dat Other Boll*x making money off hate and lies…. who’d have thunk it.
The sooner its the 22nd of May the better, this is just getting silly now
‘…..prior to this there has been no sign of a no campaign in Dundalk that I’ve seen’….Dundalk is in the archdiocese of Armagh and archbishop Martin has been very vocal calling for a ‘no’ vote.
This is the weak link, the grey area where the ref could stumble; does a child have a say in who parents it him/her?
Children of heterosexual parents get to pick them? Lmao.
Meanwhile, in Britain:
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/05/12/david-cameron-appoints-anti-gay-marriage-mp-to-be-minister-for-equalities/?utm_source=PNFBimg&utm_medium=socialFBimg&utm_campaign=PNFacebook
Dundalk Institute of Technology has a gay pride flag up since the students signed a petition to hoist it outside the main campus building for the referendum campaign.
http://talkofthetown.ie/2015/03/24/rainbow-flag-given-permanent-status-on-dundalk-it-campus/
Since then, the whole college has been ringed by “No” posters. Funny that….
the No vote is playing on peoples fears and a lack of information on the consequences of the vote. Why aren’t the political parties countering with the facts around the implications of the vote? It feels like the no vote are gaining momentum by muddying the waters and no one is countering them.
That comment could be applied to the No campaign from every referendum I can remember with the notable exception of the Seanad abolition referendum. The No campaign is always about the fear. Having watched the debates, all the facts and evidence presented to counter their fear is dismissed out of hand and the fear restated. A simple example of this was Ronán Mullen’s response to the statement from the adoption agency fella (can’t remember his name) on the Claire Byrne show. As soon as the clip was finished he said “Well I’m not convinced” and then repeated all his fears that had been shown to be incorrect in the clip.
*Why aren’t the political parties countering with the facts around the implications of the vote?*
I think they are. However, witness the antics of Ronan Mullen on Clare Byrne. He was allowed to imply that Geoffrey Shannon was an unprofessional political appointment with scant understanding of the nature of his role and a completely unreliable witness to the adoption process. It has not been my understanding to date that this is a true or accurate reflection of Mr. Shannon’s reputation in his job, however I would imagine that the impression, once given, has had an impact.
This is unconcionable behaviour, but how does one argue against it?
My reading of that is that she only wants a mammy.
She doesn’t want a daddy at all.
There’s a lot of No campaign posters that say a mother’s love is irreplaceable and Ronán Mullen talks about birth being the last experience a surrogate child has of a mother’s love.
For me this just highlights the sexist attitude of the No campiagn who believe a woman’s role is to stay at home minding the children and that a fathers’ love is pretty much irrelevant.
Also the No campaign don’t seem to think Lesbians exist at all
+1. Though with their traditional views of mothers are carers, I’m not sure it fits into their baby-stealing gays narrative as easily.
jesus. any argument that includes “everyone knows” is automatically invalid.
Religious organisations/people especially the catholic church, should have no powers over a nations laws and peoples freedom and human rights, as their whole belief system is an ancient and ‘made up’. Total Fiction!
Also these same Religious organisations freely let their clergy Rape & torture children for decades, maybe centuries, and now they are all concerned about children’s welfare? Give us a break
Yes centuries, heck, probably for millennia !
Yes, I wonder why nobody, when they’re getting up on their high horse about childrens’ rights, ever asks them how these rights were served by selling them off to Americans and calling it adoption or imprisoning and enslaving young women in laundries, or moving paedos around so they always had fresh meat? I imaagine those would be difficult defend.
On that basis, I’d say their record on children’s rights is patchy, if you massively ignore most of their record.
And let’s not forget, these are the same crowd who were against Noel Browne’s mother and child reforms. Maternal health and child welfare were apparently not a priority for them at that time, why would we think they had changed in any way?
are ya allowed to just lie like that to sway voters? is that not illegal? also, the whole thing is punctuated with a bizarre bit about primary schools having to teach about same-sex relationships .. like thats a bad thing. wtf?
Yes you’re allowed lie. Not only that but the state broadcaster will ensure that your lie gets equal voice to facts. Because apparently lies are opinions, everyone is entitled to an opinion and everyone’s kickstarter has merit
The “Think of the Children” argument is moot:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_and_Family_Relationships_Act_2015
There is no argument. There is no ground for Iona to stand on. Why are the Yes side not being more vocal in communicating this?
It’s for lazy, feeble minded or broken (my sympathies to 2 n 3).
Are the authors actively helping Irish adults, sold to US as babies, to get birth records from all these unchristian Sisters and Brothers of No Mercy… ? Right to mother and father like… – no?