Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Days Like This
Sir Van the Man: The Queen has knighted Irish music legend Van Morrison
He called it a “huge honour.”
10.55pm, 12 Jun 2015
12.9k
47
File photo of Van Morrison. Empics Entertainment
Empics Entertainment
BELFAST MUSIC LEGEND Van Morrison has been given a Knighthood in Queen Elizabeth’s birthday honours list, which was announced tonight.
In a statement on his website, the 69-year-old singer called it a “huge honour.”
Throughout my career I have always preferred to let my music speak for me and it is a huge honour to now have that body of work recognised in this way.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the fans who have supported me on my musical journey.
The official citation says Morrison has been knighted “For services to the Music Industry and to Tourism in Northern Ireland.”
Van isn’t the only Irishman to receive the highest honour, however.
Dublin-born Ciarán Devane, Chief Executive of the British Council, has also been given a knighthood “for services to cancer patients.”
The Irishman, educated at UCD, was head of MacMillan Cancer Support, the UK’s largest cancer charity, until last October.
Also knighted are former Wales and Lions rugby player Gareth Edwards and comedian Lenny Henry, and the American actor and star of House of Cards, Kevin Spacey, who was given an honorary knighthood.
Actor Benedict Cumberbatch has been given some form of payback, after losing out to fellow Brit Eddie Redmayne for this year’s Best Actor Oscar.
The star of Sherlock is now a Commander of the British Empire (CBE), while Redmayne, who played Stephen Hawking in The Theory of Everything, is a mere Officer (OBE).
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
Considering the antics they scheme and the misinformation they spread, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was No campaigners themselves removing the posters in an attempt to to get media attention to their ’cause’.
Can we even believe them when they say their posters were removed? Do they have proof? Are there independent witnesses to verify those putting up ‘no’ posters were harrassed?… At this stage, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this is just another desperate ploy the ‘no’ side are using to try to detract from the fact that the referendum simply asks: ‘Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex?’.
Nah, it wouldn’t work “both ways” because the Yes side already has all the media attention. Mainly because we are on the right side of history and we all know it.
To be fair if I seen any of these posters outside my childs school etc I would remove them not only do the raise questions from children its highly insensitive to my nephew who lost his mother when he was only 3 as if rubbing in his face he doesn’t have a mother was bad enough kids are school are starting to take notice he doesnt have a mother when it was never even given a second thought beforehand.
I don’t think you’re being very fair and you seem to assume no voters are bad, out of touch people but I would just like to remind you of this.
Same Sex relationships were shunned in the past and obviously many lesbians and gays have suffered for this, many in very cruel ways and now public opinion is changing. Some people are fine with it now, others aren’t comfortable and would see approving this referendum as ‘redefining marriage and parenthood’ I’m not say whether or not that is my view but that’s what I’ve learned from it so far.
I think a fair thing to do would be to be respectful towards No voters no matter how much you disagree with them is to have respect and if you want to show your disagreement do it by debating facts and your points and reasoning for voting yes as what you are doing right now is giving No voters a label of being out of touch schemers who are homophobic which I don’t think is true. If you truly want to be better than them do it by being above that and by respecting people’s right to their own opinion and decision. Thanks if you take this on board :-)
That would be very sad indeed but I’d recommend making a complaint first otherwise you could get into a bit of trouble. That’s an awful thing to happen to him though and I wish him all the best.
At no point I’ve said ‘no voters are bad’. At first I was refering to the campaigners, mainly thinking of the Iona institute that, to me, represent a form of evil.
Then with the ‘wrong side of history’ I think about slave owners that thought they were doing the best for their slaves. Because the slaves wouldn’t be able to do anything for themselves so they needed to be owned to protect them from themselves.
That’s exactly how I see the no voters. They think they are doing the best for society because they cannot understand that it could be better any other way. They are not bad, just blinded. They can say the exact same thing about Yes voters.
But looking at how other countries are legislating around same sex marriage, I have no doubt that marriage equality is the future, and not the other way around.
@David Nolan. Marriage is not related to procreation. Gay people will continue having sex and, unsurprisingly, no children will be conceived. Straight people will continue having sex at about the same rate and, also unsurprisingly, gay children will be conceived.
I’ve read elsewhere that schools are contacting Mothers & Fathers Matter to have their No posters removed from the vicinity of school grounds. Which is somewhat ironic.
Has this been verified, and are M&FM including these requests in their “pull down” statistics?
I don’t condone any pulling down of any poster, but I do have to wonder if M&FM have sought to orchestrate this media attention by deliberating putting up posters which are both irrelevant to the topic of the Referendum, and likely to cause offence to sections of the general populace?
I don’t like the Iona Institute either but to say they represent a form of evil is a bit much for me.
I don’t think the analogy of slave owners is an effective one and the original post was very vague in regards to it but you have decided to clear that up now which is fine, I’m not saying I agree with what you’re saying but it’s your opinion.
I’m on the fence about the referendum and I’m still not sure which side I’m going to pick and to be perfectly honest when I was thinking about voting Yes many of your own campaigners have put me off the idea as I’ve seen a terrible hypocrisy growing within the campaign with some people.
I think the ‘Yes’ campaign has been just as bad as the ‘No’ campaign in regards to the issues we’ve seen and no side deserves the full share of the blame when they both deserve it.
I just hope you can be more clear in what you say for the future as you may end up offending someone which is obviously not what we want in civilized debate or at the very least we want to minimize it. Thanks
I know of a Yes canvasser who was told by a No voter that they were voting no because they “don’t condone buggery”.
Also another who was told by a No voter that they were voting No “in order to save the canvasser’s soul”.
Also another was told by a No voter that they have actively turned away gay couples from their B&B.
The No side do not have a monopoly on being “harassed” – and they definitely need to take their minds out of other peoples’ bedrooms.
We all need to take a deep breath and focus on the actual issues in this Referendum. The people whose lives will be actually affected by it deserve that courtesy.
Yes the school have made a compliant and if they are not down by monday (when the kids are back) they will be removed, thankfully alot of parents agree that its not right to be including the children in this debate
There is no debate, the only issues no campaigners are bringing up have NOTHING to do with the referendum itself. Surrogacy, protection of children. Right to a mother and a father. None of these have anything to do with the referendum and they are only being brought into the discussion to confuse people on the fence. I find that disgraceful, and, ultimately, evil. For there are honest people on the fence that actually believe the nonsense the no campaginers are using to defend their bigotry.
I haven’t seen anyone claiming no voters are claiming a monopoly on it but I think of the two people you mentioned one was rude and I don’t think that was a nice thing to say at all. In regards to the second one that one seems okay with me even a bit of a nice way to say it if that person firmly believes they are saving the canvassers soul.
If they turned away gay couples that’s a bad thing to do but it’s them the fools that are losing business in the end.
Bear in mind I took all of your points and instances/scenarios as if they are true and giving you the benefit of the doubt :)
No argument has swayed me yet by the way guys, still on the fence :P
Glad to hear, that would have been hard on the kid. I think neither Yes nor No posters should be allowed near schools but that’s just personal opinion. (Primary Schools anyway)
@ Al Fonso
It’s all a matter of opinion it seems to me at the end of the day, no one’s opinion has swayed me because they are so sure they are right they don’t seem to want to have a more in depth look at both sides ( in my opinion but explain to me why if im wrong)
I think I will really decide on the matter when I have a study of the difference between civil partnership and marriage because It’s confusing me a bit so basically I will tell you guys what I know about the whole thing and my opinion on different issues.
I would first like to point out my lack of knowledge in regards to the actual meaning of marriage and it’s function (indepth anyway) and the different between civil partnership.
I think that in regards to it being performed in a church/place of worship that the ceremony should only be held if the church/place of worship allows it. If it is in regards to simply being recognized by the state I’m happy with it going through.
If marriage is relevant and actually relating to children as much as one’s partner then I think they do have a place in arguments by both sides because that would mean re-defining it.
To be fair the only decision anyone should be making on this is whether they believe that SSC should be allowed the same level of status regarding marriage in Ireland to that of a hetero couples in the eyes of the state only (therefore protecting the church for those that want it)
The whole redefining of marriage it to account that marriage is no longer the bases for a family to be fair its not for most of modern society
I was married in the eyes of the state (after having a child) to the man I love and have committed my life to in that I trust him to make decisions for me when I am unable to do so myself ahead of my parents/siblings etc.
I am voting yes so that my child whether she falls in love with a man or woman can freely commit the same way I have to my husband and she will not have to take a second rate marriage (civil partnerships) to do so.
A better analogy would be the civil rights marches in N. Ireland during the 60′s and 70′s. I personally think a lot of the No campaign posters should be removed as they are misleading people about the vote.
In every Star Trek I’ve seen. People loose their corporeal forms to become pure energy and reproduce differently ,but then again THATS SCIENCE FICTiON !
How desperate are the no side if they have to resort to laughable extinction event sensationalism. News flash – the earth’s human population is over 7 billion, and if it keeps on going this way, overpopulation will kill us all off long before your god bestirs himself to punish us for letting gay people get married.
Children deserve not to be lied to via ridiculously oversimplified election posters created by a group of grown adults who don’t seem to understand that the world is a complex place full of diverse individuals who could not possibly live up their perverse ideals of love. Children need love, care and respect……not lies, hate and agendas.
“I would first like to point out my lack of knowledge in regards to the actual meaning of marriage and it’s function (indepth anyway) and the different between civil partnership.”
Answer:
1. Until last month when the Child & Family Relationship Act was past, there were 160 distinctions between Civil Partnership and Civil Marriage. That list has been whittled down, but some significant ones remain. For example:
A. Civil Partnership is based in Statute. It exists at the pleasure of the Oireachtas and may be repealed at any future point by any conservative government. By contrast, Civil Marriage is protected by the Constitution. So at present, the State can disolve homosexual partnerships, but NOT straight marriages.
B. A civil partner has no relationship with the children s/he may be jointly rearing. For example, if a civil partner is ill in hospital, his/her “family” are not entitled to visit.
“I think that in regards to it being performed in a church/place of worship that the ceremony should only be held if the church/place of worship allows it. If it is in regards to simply being recognized by the state I’m happy with it going through.”
You are being asked to vote on civil marriage ONLY – not on holy matrimony. Civil Marriages take place in a Registry Office/similar venue before a civil servant. All religions and faiths will continue to celebrate holy matrimony as they have always done. This will not change irrespecctive of the Referendum result.
More detailed explanations of the issues involved can be found on the website of the State Referendum Commission. The Commission is impartial and unbiased, and is chaired by a Justice of the High Court:
Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It is a relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law, also regarding children I believe It is in the child’s best interests that he/she be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother.The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex “marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He/she will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him. He/she will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model.
Same-sex “marriage” ignores a child’s best interests.
@maurice, what about adopted children, you say that children should have a right to their natural mother and father. Your gripe seems be with homosexuals being parents and not with a straight couple adopting, why don’t you just say what you mean. You must are also be aware that this referendum will not stop gay people from being parents or adopting. This referendum is solely about same sex couples getting civilly married, you need to read up in what we are asked to vote on.
Living in a small rural village I’ve tried to debate with the local holier than thou types and honestly they are not voting no for any other reason but that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of the lord. So obviously for them its not a sin to sleep with their sister but it is a sin to sleep with their brother. Also I’ve heard the gem about the majority of gay men being peadophiles and cant be trusted with children. There is no debating with these brainwashed masses and it is important that our children are more tolerant to any one who is not exactly like them. VOTE YES !
We bring in all these environmental taxes to combat waste etc… surely these posters are irrelevant in this day and age. A heavy environmental tax should be implemented for every single poster erected. This would force a shift to newspaper articles and online media campaigns. How many million trees are used to promote various elections and referendums
“So obviously for them its not a sin to sleep with their sister but it is a sin to sleep with their brother.”
Sleeping with one’s sibling is incest, which is a sin and, crucially, a crime. Therefore, the idea that devout Catholics don’t regard sleeping with their sister as a crime is absurd.
There shouldn’t even be a debate on this, it’s plain and simple, do you support people having equal rights or not? The no campaign is nothing but masked homophobia and it has no place in 21st century life
Not even worth debating then…..that’s some stance alright. Pig ignorant and bombastic, I’ll bet your dizzy with the echoes in your own head as you repeat again and again your old bucket of bile.
The no campaign mentions “traditional marriage” constantly yet traditional marriage and its sanctity was thrown out the window when divorce was legalised. They mention a child needs a mother and a father, my mother did a fantastic job raising me by herself. Michael D Higgins has already said that gay adoption is on its way to Ireland in the coming years so all the No campaign have to offer are these stupid lies that do nothing but harm their own argument, nobody is forcing the Catholic Church to accept these marriages or even perform them, the only change is that the state will formally recognise the marriage and they will have the same legal rights as a straight married couple.
‘There shouldn’t be debate’ is one of the most stupidly authoritarian statements one can make. I’d like to think that any reasonable person will vote yes, but debate is what’s needed if there is a significant opposition. If only to enlighten. Awful, patronising statements like yours Brian are why I’m increasingly ashamed to call myself a liberal.
Eric, i was saying hypothetically, of course a debate is encouraged but at the end of the day you’re debating against a human rights issue and that disgusts me
I was parodying the pig ignorant authoritarian comment by the OP. I am all for a free and fair debate it is the yes side that is intimidating and harassing the opponent in an attempt to stifle any debate, the destructions of these posters being the prime example.
Will you get me a daddy Top Cat? Mine ran off. It’s my right to have both, right? I don’t care who he is as long as he’s a man. Can you get one for my buddy too? His died. Thanks, appreciate you looking out for me.
Masked homophobia? Ah come on Jeez talk about a ignorant view for a start do you realize two of the most outspoken people against gay marriage in Ireland are gay men namely blogger Paddy Manning and writer Keith Mills whom both have been on TV speaking against gay marriage. Or perhaps they are homophobes too?.
Yes, I recall that David. Top Cat deliberately changed the wording on a UN charter to try to further his argument! He’s really taking this ‘the posters can say whatever they want’ thing seriously.
Nothing prevents someone from being a homophobe, not even sexual orientation. Wanna hear about some other raging homophobic US pastor found out taking the services of male prostitutes? Or asking boys for naked pictures?
Also, Paddy Manning and Keith Mills arguments against same sex marriage are the same old tirade of misinformation and non sequiturs. They add nothing of relevance to the debate.
Article 7 & Article 9 of the United Nations Convention on the rights of the Child:
7: “…children have a right to know and as far as possible to be cared for by their parents”
9: “…state parties shall ensure that a child shall not be seperated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review in accordance with applicable law and procedures that such separation is necessary in the best interest of a child”
Now does Adam & Steve’s emotional urges to parent constitute state designed seperation of Mother & Child as outlined in Article 9?
I want to clarify what i said before more people misinterpret it, when i said there shouldn’t be a debate i meant that there shouldn’t be anyone on the no side, we live in the 21st century and homosexuals should be allowed to live with the same rights as heterosexuals.
Debating is democratic but I feel it’s wrong when its regarding an issue involving human rights.
Although pulling down opposition posters is undemocratic, you can understand why. People see these posters and easily see through the propaganda and lies that are essentially spreading hate and telling gays they shouldn’t be allowed marry because it’ll harm the children even when 100% of gay children are made my a man and a woman
Of course there should be a bloody debate about it. Do it openly and the people who vote No – and there will be quite a lot of them – might not like it but they’ll accept that it’s valid. Just as the losing side in elections accept it. How do you think it’s going to go without a debate?
Isn’t it strange how even regular readers of your vitriol have trouble discerning between your parody of arrogant authoritarianism and your regular posts, Topcat?
You do realise that gay couples can already adopt kids right!? The referendum has nothing to do with what parents kids have, it’s about equality and giving everyone the right to marry. Whether it’s man/woman, man/man or woman/woman, the child is going to be fine. The no campaign has no valid arguments and to be honest I think anyone that would vote no should be ashamed of themselves for denying people a human right based on sexual orientation.
Never said anything about their debate ideals at all?!?. I was simply making the point that the ‘masked homophobia’ point by Brian is completely absurd,insulting and alarmist as there is gay people against gay marriage (several in the public eye).
I wish more people on here would mask their homophobia, some of the things that get said about lgbt people on here are disgusting. And could cause untold damage to any person young or old who is struggling to accept themselves.
@Richard, yeah Tom Cat does realises that the referendum has nothing to do with kids, he however just ignores the truth. He was saying the other day that the gays are going to go and swipe newborn kids from their mothers breasts.
These posters have nothing to do with the MARRIAGE EQUALITY referendum. They are advocating for a no vote for surrogacy which there is no referendum on. Surrogacy is a statutory matter and is to be dealt with by the dail.
Don’t election posters have to relate to the election in order to be put up in the first place. These ones look to be about the Children and Family Relationships Bill, which passed in February.
Maybe it’s the general public exercising democracy by removing them of their own free accord!!! I will ask again top cat how does granting equal marriage rights to LGBT couples ensure children will be denied loving parents?
Exactly. One of the no posters going around appears to be asking people to vote no for surrogacy. Pretty sure “Do you agree with surrogacy?” is not going to be on the ballot paper.
Pretty sure it’s irrelevant SK they can say “The Sky is Green an the Grass is blue vote No” and you still shouldn’t destroy or interfere with them in a democracy.
@Top Cat I’m not advocating that people take down any posters relating to the referendum, whether from the Yes or No side.
But the posters about surrogacy have literally nothing to do with the upcoming referendum. They don’t make any reference whatsoever to it actually. So these posters have been put up illegally I would think. I can’t just go putting up posters saying “Bananas? I don’t think we should eat them. Vote No” unless there’s a referendum about eating bananas. It is illegal to put up posters without permission – I think it is likely that permission has been granted for posters relating to the referendum, which these are not.
Ewan you would be perfectly within your rights to make that poster and display it and I would not interfere with your democratic right under any circumstance.
Except that the ‘no’ posters are not actually focusing on the marriage referendum topic, they are implying that families which don’t have a mammy and a daddy are inferior. Taking down posters which are not relevant to the issue at hand could be argued to be promoting democracy!
As a single parent I could be highly offended by this portrayal. (though actually, I can’t be arsed….never get into a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent…it’ll only end in frustration!)
A family with a mother AND father is surely the ideal? Like, I’ll be voting yes but single parent homes are hardly ideal for the children or society and same sex is simply a bit of an unknown. I’d tend to believe that the two genders even each other out and give a more balanced upbringing. Obviously not in every single situation but overall.
Calling a family without both a mother and father “inferior” is trying to make it an emotive thing, but a child having a mother and father is, in my opinion the ideal for that child. Having two parents of the same sex comes a close in terms of quality of environment (all else being equal).
I’m far more concerned with the prevalence of single parent households where I believe there is evidence that it leads to poorer outcomes for the child.
RED HERRINGS. These are the things used by people who know they cannot win an argument to deflect attention away from the key issues by bringing emotional and irrelevant issues to the fore.
I am horrified with the amount of untruth that the no campaign are distributing that is offensive and hurtful and above all else – inaccurate. A yes vote will not destroy the meaning of family. It will create more families and protect the previously unrecognized families in our society.
Children are not required to make a family. The courts have already established in Murray v Ireland [1985] IR 532, a childless couple were held to be a family within the meaning of Article 41. So why are the no campaign making this all about children?
Focus on the issue – why are you fundamentally opposed to giving a same sex couple the same protection under the constitution as an opposite sex couple? What are you afraid of?
What right have you got to deny anyone a constitutional protection? I have no doubt you would respond fiercely to any person who would attack you or your families rights and tell you that you are worth less than your neighbour. So why – as a no voter – would you be the person attacking and telling gay people that they are worth less than you.
Vote No posters were put up all along the Malahide Road including outside of schools like Mount Temple. aome students promptly
painted a rainbow on the driveway at the gate of the school. Amazing how young people can be far more eloquent and to the point than there supposedly more intellectual and mature elders.
I have to say when we think about homophobic bullying we’d usually consider it something which is mostly confined to schools. If anything has been shown as a result of this debate is that the young people of Ireland are truly an amazing asset to the country. When adults (and when I use that in relation to the bigots arguing against equality for gay people) are making a show of themselves every chance they get the young people of all ages out canvassing and campaigning it’s really brilliant to see.
Ireland is changing, one way or another and the anti-equality bigots are soon to be left far behind.
What a wonderful response from those students. They are a credit to both their school and their parents. And a great example of our young people having more wit then many grown adults.
I am not voting because its none of my business, all I see from this debate is that all the no side are shouted down and called bigots, some no doubt are exactly that.
How ever the yes side, I.e the liberals, traditionally promoted diverse views and opinions.
To the undecided they are starting to sound like bullies, their way or the highway, conform, conform, conform,
‘The group pointed to an incident in which a Polish-Irish national campaigning for the ‘No’ side had abuse shouted at him while erecting ‘No’ posters.’
Would it be unfair of me to suggest that the NO campaigners can now , in a small way identify with Gay people? In that Gay people have to sadly endure abuse shouted at them by homophobes all too often on the streets of Ireland.
Yes remember how we all were enthralled by Breda’s description of being forced back into a closet ,by coming out ( if you will ) in an attempt to push the rest of us back into a church .
But then again it’s not her first time at the rodeo and amazingly she gets paid to write her column ,so I guess that’s why nobody is surprised or interested when she tries to co opt ,gay men’s and wo,end real life struggles and experiences to further her “ethos “
Now I know this might get a few aul red thumbs BUT I drove from Sligo to our fair capital yesterday and just before Longford I saw what can only be described as a tsunami of no posters all along the road on every single pole, as someone who likes to live and let live, by the time I’d seen the 20th One with complete BS written on it, I was seeing red so I can actually see why some people would pull them Down as most of them are insulting a down right derogatory towards anyone who thinks to be a good parent, it must involve two people of the opposite sex. If that was the case, all children with a mammy and a daddy would be perfect. Well sorry folks but looking a today’s society and indeed history, that’s a crock of sh#t! A good parent is a good parent, whether they are male and female, female and female, male and male or just male or just female!
Sorry there now, I meant to say posters are insulting to those of us who believes it takes more to be a good parent than just been members of the opposite sex. Appologies!!!!
Both the Yes & No camps should respect each others views & opinions however different. I will definitely be voting yes next month but I don’t condone the behaviour of the Yes camp ripping down No posters & trying to guilt trip No voters into voting Yes as it’s not respecting the democracy we have in Ireland.
I agree with the fact that anyone who votes no is simply not living in the 21st century but it doesn’t mean that they should be forced into voting Yes to something they don’t agree on. That isn’t democracy, that’s borderline propaganda!
I do hope the same-sex referendum is passed but I also do hope in the mean time that our right to democracy is respected and not tarnished by lambasting a no voter because of their decision to vote no.
Ewan it’s not like they are saying you cannot have oxygen (basic human right). Regardless of your own clear beliefs the democratic process has to be respected.
Whether it is “equality” is core to the debate, Ewan.
Do you think a married gay man is more equal than a single gay man?
Marriage redefinition is what this is about, because nobody actually established whether there is a right to SSM.
That’s why the debate is so poor.
Too much presumption.
“Do you think a married gay man is more equal than a single gay man?”
Logic not your strong point. After SSM referendum passes, there will still be single gay men. Some will never marry anyone. Yet they will all be more equal compared to all the straight men, in respects of being able to marry the person they love.
Not all families are about children. Some straight couples don’t (and some can’t) have children. We don’t revoke their marriage, do we.
My point Al Fonso, is that the “equality” being sought will only benefit one narrow interest group. So in this debate, other issues relating to inequality in marriage is being completely ignored. A huge elephant in the room is the question of whether, if the referendum passes, all marriages will be equal?
That’s not such a dumb question.
What has my location got to do with anything, Paul? That’s the second time in a very short space of time on comments relating to two very different issues you’ve made reference to my location,
I’m an Irish citizen, with friends and family in Ireland and I’m as entitled to comment on political matters in Ireland as anyone else.
If you weren’t so ignorant of the issues you mouth off on you’d know there are limited circumstances in which Irish people can vote from overseas though postal ballot. Whether or not they apply to me is none of your business.
Can you please put your growing obsession with my location to rest, please.
Emigrants don’t have a vote, Alan.
Another “equality” issue, perhaps?
You’re quite vocal and sometimes abusive about what people say here on a issue where they are entitled to a vote.
So is Mammy keeping a polling card warm for you?
A list of where Paul is wrong:
Nowhere did I say I had a vote.
In some circumstances Irish citizens overseas can vote.
I’ve said here on Journal.ie in the past that I don’t necessarily believe Irish citizens outside Ireland should be entitled to vote.
I’m an Irish citizen, with friends and family in Ireland and I’m as entitled to comment on political matters in Ireland as anyone else.
That’s not as fully as you think it is.
Do the No side forget that the last time we had a policy of ‘right to a mother and father’ women were forcibly imprisoned in catholic slave houses and their children sold to the highest bidder!!
No Al. There are no Catholics involved in this debate AT ALL. Sure Lolek Ltd t/a Iona Institute have nothing to do with this debate and aren’t using a front organisation Mothers and Fathers Matter (or the Helen Lovejoy Institute as it was referred to on Twitter) are a grassroots organisation which is funded very viably though donation.
Ok, so taking down those posters is an offence, but printing posters that have absolutely nothing to do with the upcoming referendum is A-OK? Got it.
The No side have some cheek!
This debate brings out the stupid in people. Vote whatever you want but please just shut up about it now. You won’t change anyone’s mind either way ffs.
No worries…..Iona institute (Lolek Ltd) will just hit up their crazy fundamentalist backers in the US for some more money for new posters. Church has plenty of money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Top Cat – GLEN, TENI and MarriagEquality are three groups that benefited from grants from Atlantic Philanthropies from 2004-2013. The funds received were certainly used to promote and support the drive towards equality and thus has brought us to this referendum, and the above organisations acknowledge and are thankful for the financial support they received.
However if you are suggesting that the money from AP was requested and released on a whim then you are VERY mistaken. As someone who knows a member of one of those groups, they all had MOUNTAINS of paperwork and had to submit detailed accounts as prospective projects before one dollar was released. The accounts of all the groups involved are open to scrutiny.
Now compare that legal and accountable funding to the unknown and uncontrolled financial backers of Lolek Ltd and its offshoots and you will see that there can be no comparison of the transparency of the LGBT organisations to the secret and subversive attributed to the Iona Catholic Lobby group.
Gay couples can already adopt as of May 6th. The posters are misleading. Gay couples can have children by IVF and adoption irregardless of the referendum.
Grasping at straws as usual here the ‘No’ campaigners. Not content with confounding the referendum issue with stuff that has sweet f all to do with it, now they want to play the victim card.
After they lose this referendum, they will claim the referendum was illegal or some other s-h-i-t like that.
You keep saying the same things. There’s a lady-doth-protest-too-much air about it. The Yes side are winning so try spreading a positive message instead of your childish goading of the other side
Disgusting anti democratic and authoritarian conduct by the yes side. This behaviour should be roundly criticised and reject by any citizen of a democracy.
You for real the government should be ashamed allowing no posters to be put up! Gay people are human ! They are teachers,firemen, gardai , doctors, nurses they are no different to straight couples! they way gay people in Ireland are been treated is unreal. The no campaigners are a disgrace and should cop on cause this election will be a Yes vote!
Too cat did it ever occur to you that perhaps citizens who are not members of any YES group are removing them as they don’t like the message? I will remove any located in view of my property
I am not a member of the Yes campaign just a citizen
Is he Jared whatshisface ?
Hes claiming to be the product of a single parent upbringing but another poster on here has challenged that saying his parents Finbar and Linda brought up the little zealot .
Was on a radio show doing a double act with his mother or sister playing unrelated outraged citizens against the equality mural .
This is hookers for Jesus bathsh#t crazy
Top Cat, It is not for you to declare that the mural was “illegal”,
It is not for you to say that removing the No posters is a criminal offence.
You are a moral and dogmatic dictator, not a civil law Judge.
Top cat, you may have an opinion on the matter but, assessing you by reference to your previous posts, I consider your opinions as worthless as your misrepresentation of facts.
“Cllr Mannix Flynn told TheJournal.ie yesterday:
Stuff like that would fall in breach of planning. It’s a listed building. As far as I know, a lot of complaints came in. They would be forwarded to planning and planning would issue a general warning letter saying it was in breach and requesting removal by a certain date. If that is not removed, a letter of enforcement would be sent out. It’s about due process.”
I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t happy to see the No posters dissapear,seeing as their content has almost nothing to do with the actual issues and is instead a scaremongering tactic….
But they shouldn’t be taken down, if just for the fact that they seem to actually hinder the No sides argument more than help it.
Speaking as a lone parent, I would not like my daughter to see those posters. In fact any child who has lost a parent might feel a little isolated seeing this message displayed.
Posters shouldn’t be allowed to communicate anything more than the date. If someone is so susceptible to the marketing ploy of capaign posters that they would base their decision on them, they don’t deserve the right to vote
The gloves are off and frankly the NO posters are down right offensive.Not just to gay people but to children of single parents , children of divorce ,those who have had a parent die ect.They are also trying to introduce an issue that is in no way related to the referendum and in my view as both an adopted person and as someone who lost my adopted mother at an early age the NO posters are fair game.In fact Id say they are deliberately trying to introduce a completely false message that somehow gays are a danger to children.That is a slanderous accusation in itself.Compared to the lies and dirty tricks being spun by the NO side a few offensive posters being pulled down is nothing.Besides oncevtge referendum is over I can’t imagine the NO side being too quick to remove them themselves.
The bill is about same sex marriage! No about a child having a mother and a father! I want to marry my partner because I don’t want to be in the position to left out if he died, I don’t want to be denied the access to a hospital ward to visit him if he suffer an accident, I want my partner to be my family, my husband! That’s the meaning of this vote. No one is talking bout children!
If you vote No you are truly warped. If you honestly believe two loving people cant raise a child you are not worth my time. To deny a loving couple the chance to live in a society as equals is monstrous.
Come at me bru, lay your ‘No’ logic before me, I need a good laugh
I drove through a town that had 30 of the no posters on a 400meter stretch, I drove through the same town an hour later and saw a young lad in shorts & a football jersey taking them down.
I’d say they are being removed because they are offensive to single parents, to infertile couples & to anyone who intends to vote yes! If I was involved in the yes campaign I would help the no campaign erect these signs because they would only serve to strengthen the yes campaign. They are outrageous
That’s it in one. They are not just offensive to gay people but also a deeply personal attack on kids and adults who have been raised outside a ‘traditional’ family unit as well as being seen as a clear message to single parents that they’re not providing the best environment to raise their kids.
I was harassed by a person campaigning on behalf of M&FM. A woman tried to hand me a flyer and, not wanting to get into a heated debate in the middle of street, kept my head down and said “No thank you.” She grabbed my arm, tried to force her flyer into my bag, told me I was sick and asked if I was a paedophile. Shocked, I said “Excuse me?!” To which she replied “Well you obviously don’t care about the future of our children.” I was so upset.
Well it would be better if they had a rule where each side has a set quota of posters to put up on lampposts (something I think should be banned outright to be honest)
I mean there are the hundreds of the same 4 stock photos from the No side plastered on every lamppost on Drumcondra high st for instance .
Then you have to consider that the posters at least from the no-side have bugger all to do with the referendum, obviously saying “We hate gays” isn’t as catchy as “Oh won’t somebody please think of the children”
I’m going to rip down every YES poster I encounter from here on in.
I’m going to spray paint any that can’t be removed.
Someone has to stand up to these fascists.
You are, like the rest of the trolls on here, a keyboard warrior. If you were caught by a group of teenage lesbians while you were trying to rip down a Yes poster you’d crap your pants.
Fascist,the new clarion call for the bigoted conservative ,you do not have the right to discriminate,using the term by the way in this context is a slap in the face of history and to every gay person singled out and killed by the nazis .
People not sharing your bigotry is not an affront to the democratic system, tearing down a poster is not the same as being queer bashed neither by the way are your views being challenged in any way comparable to the discrimination and abused heaped upon gay people .
These posters shouldn’t be up until he first place and Gardai should be investigating how this group can be misrepresenting facts in arguing for a no vote . Most people see through this crowd , leave up the posters shows just how low these individuals will stoop to argue their point . Everyone is entitled to an opinion if that opinion is based on truth and honesty and I respect no voters , however dirty tricks will never win and argument
Only no voters love and care for children and only No voters devote their lives to the love and nurturance of children. That is what the No side imply.
All Yes voters are bad, neglectful and irresponsible who are eager to sell off children to people who are homosexual people and ensure that the little children have neither a mummy nor a daddy.
The No side think that there is a conspiracy to “de-parent” children.
The position of the No side is laughable, risible, irrational and misplaced. The No side is doing a superb job in discrediting its already feeble and febrile notions.
If the no campaign wasn’t peddling lies and utter tripe, then maybe people would leave the posters alone.
I haven’t seen a decent argument for a no vote yet and it seems the no campaign can’t find one either.
So at the moment we don’t have gay marriage. One of the arguments on the NO side seems to be that if we allow gay marriage then these peoples kids (presuming they want kids as not all couples do) will turn out gay. So riddle me this….. since we don’t have gay marriage now, how do we have gay people?? Could it be that whether your parents are gay or not has absolutely no bearing on the issue??
Also….. just because a child may have a biological mother and a father, the mother and father are the ones who ultimately decide if the child will have a mother and father figure in their life by choosing whether to stay together or not. So the whole “a child deserves a mother and a father” argument seems fairly redundant to me.
Personally id love to see every “Vote NO” poster ripped down along with every “Vote YES” poster. People should make their own minds up and not be influenced by any particular group.
Cough eh em em I don’t think anyone with a brain believes a kid will become gay by living with gay parents cough
However
I do believe people are concerned with fact that the best parentage is a father and mother
I don’t believe people believe that 2 men brining up a kid is the best for the kid
No matter how much that might hurt gay men
I think it’s naive to think people will vote based on the quantity of posters promoting either side I do believe most people are actually intelligent
I know it sounds ridiculous but this is exactly the argument that was put to me on the street the other day by a no campaigner which made me think that perhaps ignorance and apathy might play a larger role in this issue than I was expecting.
I’m just wondering how people can form an opinion that is a “fact” that the best parentage is a father and mother. From what proven results and on what comparative study is this fact based?
Also being gay is not restricted to the male of the species. Do people have the same inherent problem with 2 women bringing up a daughter?
In regard to the posters, I do have a conflicting opinion. I believe that those on the fence, those who neither care nor are affected directly by the issue unfortunately will be influenced in some way by the posters whether it be No or YES. Its effectively advertising, and advertising does work.
There is no-one more intolerant than a liberal. It is disgraceful and utterly thuggish that the ‘Yes’ campaign have engaged in the pulling-down of ‘No’ campaign posters. The people who would do this have zero respect for the formerly sacrosanct traditions of democratic campaigning, such as the courtesy that one side would not dislodge or deface the opponents’ posters.
It is disgusting that somebody would see fit to design posters that are so insulting and hurtful, that that that they drive otherwise-law-abiding people to want to tear them down.
I don’t agree with the no campaign and will be voting yes in the election but I don’t agree with tearing down the oppositions posters. We live in a democracy and each and everyone is entitled to their own opinion (even if they are wrong!!!!).
How anyone can get so incensed about a poster is beyond me , if you are going to vote yes you will irrespective , if you are going to vote no you will irrespective.
The fact that they were taken down at all is beyond stupid , let them stay up and let the murals stay up that’s democracy ,people have the right to an opinion that’s why we are having a referendum.
If we had direct democracy and recall as they have in Switzerland we wouldn’t have half the petty squabbling we listen to every time an issue comes up that we have to vote on or are not allowed to challenge because we can’t initiate a referendum .
As someone who is on the canvassing trail I can confirm that the canvassers and the campaign have made it very clear that all posters must be left untouched. We know that the No side will complain profusely and to be honest they are a great fundraising tool for YesEquality.
The people who are defacing or removing the No posters may support the Yes vote but it is extremely unlikely that they are part of the organised Yes campaign. These posters have incensed and inflamed the anger of ordinary voting members of the public, who have thus acted on their own volition. This act is absolutely not endorsed by YesEquality from the messages we have heard.
At least 16 Yes posters by Sinn Fein were removed in Stepaside yesterday and the act was reported to the Gardai by a local councillor.
Reports from the canvassing trail are telling of verbal and physical abuse of the Yes canvassers – I was called a ‘f-king Q***r; leaflets have been waved in faces and only last night a polite female canvasser was physically intimidated by a No voter (she is 5′ 7″, he was about 6′ 2″). There are loads of other stories but they are not mine to tell, and some of them are very frightening. Even experienced political canvassers of many decades have been shook by the negativity and vitriol exhibited by the No side.
We need to get some humanity back into this referendum, before any physical incident occurs.
Helen. That type of behaviour is unacceptable, no question.
I would however draw your attention, in equal measure to the mocking of people’s religious beliefs from many on the Yes side of this argument.
A look through the various postings can confirm that. Some on the Yes side should practice the love, respect and tolerance they so call for.
I will be voting No in this referendum for the following reason. I have absolutely no issue what so ever with gay partnerships and all the protection of the law. I do not however want to see the reshaping of the conventional family where a child may have two dads or two mums. Sorry but that’s my view on these things. I do not want to see that.
These are my views and I stand by them. I am entitled to them but the Yes side are intolerant of that. It is presented that this is not about children and that is true per say but a by product of this will be two gay men or two gay women having equal rights to adopt a child. They may be loving pRents but that’s the issue.
It’s not about the rights of the adults but it’s about the right of a child to the right to have a father AND a mother.
The right of the child supersedes everybody else’s right.
Gay couples can already adopt and will continue to do so regardless of the outcome or this referendum. What this referendum will do will provide additional legal protection for children being raised by same sex parents.
So if child welfare is your concern – and you agree with child welfare experts such as the IPSCC then you should be voting YES.
I really do hope most folk here are right that the posters have never swayed that many voters I really do. But I have a right to have a problem when the no posters peddle misinformation like gays don’t care about kids and all the straight couples procreate, this is obviously untrue and I’d rather be called a pervert by the minority than have lies told about me in the campaign
If it was on my street and I could see it from my house or in front of a business I own and pay rates on and I find it offensive I would absolutely see myself as having the right to pull it down.
And yes if someone in the same position feels the same about a poster supporting the opposite side that’s fine with me. It can go without any posters.
That’s was not strictly my point Tony. I don’t think people should dress opinion as fact. Truth is there is no concrete proof that m&f parent are any better so it shouldn’t be described as fact.
Israel bombs Beirut and sites across South Lebanon after alleged Hezbollah rocket attack
Niall O'Connor
Updated
1 hr ago
7.9k
Homelessness
Number of people in emergency accommodation reaches record 15,378, including 4,653 children
Updated
10 mins ago
4.3k
26
Kenmare
'Extremely concerned': Gardaí and Michael Gaine's family make missing person appeal in Kerry
Updated
23 hrs ago
33.6k
6
Your Cookies. Your Choice.
Cookies help provide our news service while also enabling the advertising needed to fund this work.
We categorise cookies as Necessary, Performance (used to analyse the site performance) and Targeting (used to target advertising which helps us keep this service free).
We and our 160 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device. Selecting Accept All enables tracking technologies to support the purposes shown under we and our partners process data to provide. If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you. You can resurface this menu to change your choices or withdraw consent at any time by clicking the Cookie Preferences link on the bottom of the webpage .Your choices will have effect within our Website. For more details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
We and our vendors process data for the following purposes:
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
Cookies Preference Centre
We process your data to deliver content or advertisements and measure the delivery of such content or advertisements to extract insights about our website. We share this information with our partners on the basis of consent. You may exercise your right to consent, based on a specific purpose below or at a partner level in the link under each purpose. Some vendors may process your data based on their legitimate interests, which does not require your consent. You cannot object to tracking technologies placed to ensure security, prevent fraud, fix errors, or deliver and present advertising and content, and precise geolocation data and active scanning of device characteristics for identification may be used to support this purpose. This exception does not apply to targeted advertising. These choices will be signaled to our vendors participating in the Transparency and Consent Framework.
Manage Consent Preferences
Necessary Cookies
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Store and/or access information on a device 110 partners can use this purpose
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development 142 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 112 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Create profiles for personalised advertising 83 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Use profiles to select personalised advertising 83 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Create profiles to personalise content 38 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Use profiles to select personalised content 34 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Measure advertising performance 133 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Measure content performance 59 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Understand audiences through statistics or combinations of data from different sources 74 partners can use this purpose
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Develop and improve services 83 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Use limited data to select content 37 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
Use precise geolocation data 46 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification 27 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Ensure security, prevent and detect fraud, and fix errors 92 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Deliver and present advertising and content 99 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Match and combine data from other data sources 72 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Link different devices 53 partners can use this feature
Always Active
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Identify devices based on information transmitted automatically 88 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
Save and communicate privacy choices 69 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say