Irish No Voters Forbidden From Marrying

Irish people who voted No in the recent Irish marriage referendum have had their desires recognized by law, and are now forbidden from getting or being married.

Yes voters continually expressed a desire that everyone should be allowed to get married, but No voters insisted in raising the stakes, declaring that the losers of the referendum should not be allowed to wed. After being defeated 62:38, their marriages have accordingly been formally dissolved.

“The votes tell you everything you need to know,” said a government spokesperson. “The No voters declared their desire that the losers of the vote should be denied this fundamental human right, and in accordance with their wishes we’ve taken it away from them.”

All existing No voter marriages have been replaced with civil partnerships, which said voters frequently insisted were just the same. Apart from little things like lack of multiple social benefits, various legal protections, support for foreign partners, rights to shared homes in partnerships, and the absolute social segregation that comes from being told you’re not allowed to do what others can. Oh, and no longer having any legally recognized relationship with any non-biological children. But it’s generally considered the kids would be better off without them.

More Irish news:

BREAKING NEWS: Iona Institute Melting

As incoming referendum results reveal a landslide victory for marriage equality, bystanders reports that the Iona Institute is collapsing into itself in clouds of toxic vapour. David Quinn was seen staggering into the street, pink skin-paint sloughing off to reveal a villainous green, screeching “I’M MELTING!” as he collapsed into a puddle.

Professor Stuaim was on hand to explain the bizarre changes.
“It’s a simple reversal of Disney Resurrection Syndrome: instead of a hero being revived by love, the overwhelming positive feelings blanketing the country are cutting off the hate the Iona Institute requires to survive. Without the constant external oppression needed to hold their shape, they’re collapsing back into the scum and vitriol of which they’re made.”

Our reporters obtained one last quote from the oil-slicked puddle of Quinn. “What a fair and loving world!” it cried before sluicing down a storm drain. The viscous remains of the Institute are expected to be washed away by the sheer volume of celebratory prosecco popped around the city by nightfall.

More marriage material:

Catholic Bishops Reassure No Voters: ” This Time We Won’t Look Like Backwards Idiots”

Letters from Catholic bishops are being read at masses assuring No voters that — unlike all previous cases of the Church opposing progress — this time they wouldn’t look like backwards idiots trying to keep an entire country in the Dark Ages.

The Archbishop of Dublin told reporters “In the past the Church has opposed contraception and divorce. We’ve burned women at the stake, tortured people to death, and ignored facts quite literally supported by the entire sky. More recently we’ve opposed the education of children, and even fought against the American Equal Rights Act.”

“We’ve had a lot of practice opposing things that later turned out to be the most basic progress of human rights. So we’re pretty sure that this time we’ve finally found something which won’t cast us as pantomime villains. I mean, we’re hardly even sexist any more.”

At this point Diarmuid had to bend hear a reporter in the front row.

“Well, no, we don’t allow women to be priests. Is that sexist?”

More muttering.

“Jesus. Well, come on now, it’s been almost twenty years since we last enslaved women to work in Magdalene Laundries, that’s got to count for something, right? Surely we’re a moral authority again by now. It’s not like we’ve been sexually abusing kids for a century and then covering it up or anything.”

More muttering.

“Ah, but that’s got to be some individuals. You can’t say the entire structure of Catholic moral authority was used purely to preserve its own power and traditions quite literally at the expense of an entire generation?”

Really quite urgent muttering now, and the rustling of reports by the government and the UN Committee Against Torture.

“Oh Christ.”

At this point Diarmuid staggered off stage and stopped even pretending to be able to tell other people what was moral or not. When asked for further comment he told reporters “For God’s sake, why are you still listening to us? Go ask SIPTU or something. They’ve done a better job of guiding you than we have.”

More Marriage Equality:

A Marriage Proposal

It is a melancholy object to those who walk through our towns or travel our country, when they people being happy, and are tormented by the knowledge that some of those people might be happy with others of their own gender. There’s no actual way to tell these people apart, what with them all being people, so our unhappy walker is forced to imagine the lustful acts strangers consensually commit with each other. It simply isn’t possible for them to continue on their own way, with their own life and preferences, because of the agony of the knowledge that their god is facing starvation. Below I explain why this is so, and propose a novel solution.

I confess myself inexpert the sexual behaviour of total strangers, having always considered it basic manners to be on rather good terms with someone before broaching the subject of their genitals, but several pubic-spirited groups have taken great pains to educate me and the rest of the country, assuring us that these same-sex marriages be a serious crime against a god.

As to my own part, I must admit I fail to understand how the sexuality of strangers requires divine intervention. I will admit that the concept has been raised on some occasion when I’ve been involved, but must humbly report that the level of theological discussion rarely raised above repetition. Indeed, it displayed all the signs of rather poor argument, with the only evolution on each iteration being an increase of volume, but I’m happy to report that everyone involved in the vigorous discussion considered it a roaring success. But I digress.

I inquired upon a prominent member of one of the aforementioned groups to enlighten me. It is generally accepted that around one in ten people might be attracted to their own sex. With twenty thousand marriages per year in our country, the proposed decimation of heterosexual marriage would be about two thousand unions per year, approximately five and a half matrimonies per day, or one sacrament every four point four hours. Apparently the lord and savior is operating on such thin margins that even this small decline would prove an unsustainable strain on the heavenly budget.

I could not get a clear answer as to what consecrated fuel could possibly be extracted from a heterosexual couple on their wedding night, but apparently it only works when the genitals are arranged and connect to each other in a specific way. I asked if the group was confused. Perhaps they were thinking of electrical sockets, or maybe a very simple jigsaw intended for the edification of children? No, I was told, they didn’t understand what I meant by that. They just wanted to be in charge of all human love and affection.

That seemed rather beyond the remit of someone’s personal preferences, but I still considered their problem as I walked away, as it seemed to plague them. And only the most heartless imitation of a human being could let others exist in suffering, tormented by questions of externally enforced legality versus their own deepest feelings. I decided it was my duty to find a solution.

In the manner of someone caring for a friend’s sickly pet I first had to work out what it required for sustenance. And I must exhibit great care, as surely anything which can be damaged by the kindness of strangers (not even the pet, but to each other!) must be among the most vulnerable creations in existence. It occurs that perhaps this god has become rather too refined in its diet, in the manner of the panda bears which can only survive on a specific sort of bamboo, and as a result must face extinction in the face of a changing environment. But still, the panda is an adorable animal, and can provide some solace to those who enjoy its continued existence. Maybe this god is the same. It is the duty of the beneficent human to find some way of preserving such entertaining companions.

Indeed, it seems their sustaining sacrament could be quite easily provided. If their god is somehow diminished by fewer acceptable marriages, it falls upon them to increase how often they get married. This should not present a problem with the modern convenience of divorce, which doesn’t seem to offend their pet spirit in the same way an incorrect marriage does. In fact, if one can get married to feed it, and divorced without incident, even one faithful couple could presumably fill their lord to bursting by getting divorced each morning and remarried in the evening. Careful timing could synchronise their wedding cake with dessert for each day’s dinner, providing a considerable saving in the daily as well as the divine food budget.

Of course, not all No campaigners find it so easy to get married. For some reason people prepared to put their own obscure theological definitions over other people’s happiness can have difficulty finding love. Others insist that only the fruitful union of a mother and a father to produce a child can appease them, but like all people of good character I tend to ignore those who publicly insult orphans and widows.

But in the interests of the common good I shall solve their problem. I humbly offer that those who wish to prevent people in love from sharing the joys of marriage can show their support for heterosexually-hearted relationships and procreation in the most direct possible way.

They can get married on their own, and fuck themselves.

More marriage equality:

Marriage Restriction And Other Religious Parasites

In the long term marriage equality is guaranteed. Because everyone campaigning for marriage restriction has to start by revealing that they’re a soulless monster. Their position has to begin by redefining marriage as something it makes sense to restrict, and to frame that redefinition they must ask “What is marriage for?”

Imagine not knowing that. Imagine being so broken you don’t understand love, or affection, the embrace of another person, the warmth of facing the immensities of life in the knowledge you’ll never be alone again. Imagine having to ask that question, out loud, and then giving the wrong answer. Because their answers are all crap:

  • “We must produce new people in obedience of our master.”
  • “We must raise new workers in accordance with instructions from above.”
  • “We must obey these arbitrary commands from someone we’ve never seen.”

Those aren’t the words of a loving god, those are the commands of me going for a high score population when playing SimCity. And the instant anyone decries anything as unnatural they should be struck naked, their phone stops working, and all the meat in their belly becomes raw.

These opponents of equality went looking for love and they found an instruction booklet. If they weren’t so poisonous we’d pity them.

There’s only one reason we even hear these loveless ghouls. You might think it’s because their words echo around their own hollowness, an emptiness which gives them nothing better to do but reverberate their restrictions to anyone who’ll listen. But shouting simply doesn’t get you that much attention.

They prey our attention because religion has parasitized all our most important social events. Birth, death, marriage, the wise folk of those original tribes showed how wise they were by installing intellect-overrides in all the most important days of our lives. But people can still be born without a god. This has been tested. Even the most miraculous of births was only immaculate because it didn’t use a man to contribute genetic material. That’s not solving any problems. Men prepared to do that duty are not in short supply.

People still die without any of the thousands of gods too, and if choosing one to talk to when the person you really want to see is no longer available, that’s fine. But churches parasitized the promise of marriage by making it a religious ceremony as well as a civil one. And now that we’re slowly and painfully levering the leech off this event, the parasite responds chewing its way through our brains in a desperate attempt to prevent us from thinking against it. Which only makes them that much more obvious and painful to bear in the process.

Churches should be struggling towards symbiosis, strengthening the supportive aspects of religious communities. But instead they’re standing on the mountaintop screaming about who isn’t allowed to marry in a world where even couples with “permission” often skip all the skybearded fuss and heading straight to the town hall instead.

The church claims marriage as a sacrament, but they didn’t invent it. People weren’t popping into existence as immaculate quantum fluctuations until a priest said “Hey, if you incant these magical phrases you’ll be able to huddle together for warmth and funtimes!” Religion annexed it the same way they hijacked pagan winter festivals, and fertility rites, and anything else they could as they became the Walmart of belief.

Marriage equality is guaranteed in the long term. But we can’t allow monsters to spew poison and pain in the short term. That’s where we live, and it’s already far too short to allow loss of any love.

Get more divine assistance with The Original Creator’s Creation Story and The Guide To Better Blasphemy