Marriage equality referendum - "rights" to kids etc.

I am a reasonable person and I object to the Equal but Different status - It didnt work in America with the Jim Crow laws - it doesnt work here.

PMU said:
In fact we have it already in civil partnership.
Click to expand...

Incorrect - See my previous post.

Sol28 said:
They are not equal institutions - apart from the constitutional protection - there are over 160 differences between the two. See HERE for more info.
Click to expand...
 
I have a few questions percolating around that someone here might know more about than me, I would welcome input on them.

Will Civil Partnerships be done away with if the referendum passes? I have a feeling that the answer is in the literature that came through the door, but I haven't got around to reading it yet!

On the subject of adoption, I know very little. At the moment it seems there are many (or some?) people every year that adopt children as single parents. It seems from this that there are people in many situations, couples (married and unmarried) and singletons who are adopting. So, are all these situations ones where a suitable heterosexual couple weren't available? I know of a homosexual couple who have an adopted child, but I don't know the details, so it is currently possible, and it is happening, is anyone seriously saying that this is wrong and the child should be taken away?

I wonder as well, is there a difference in public perception between homosexual couples that are female-female and male-male. There seems to be a general perception, not limited to homosexual couples that a man who takes care of children is somehow deviant. From my very very limited viewing of the publicity, it seems that the No side is worrying about children with no mothers, but not about children with no fathers, in spite of studies that show that fathers are important too!

Again, I know very little about this, what I do know is 'a friend of a friend' situation. I feel that the 'no' arguments are emotionally based with little by way of facts, but I don't know much about it.
 
Always great to hear someone wanting to educate themselves on the issues. I will try my best to answer from my limited knowledge.

terrysgirl33 said:
Will Civil Partnerships be done away with if the referendum passes? I have a feeling that the answer is in the literature that came through the door, but I haven't got around to reading it yet!
Click to expand...

Civil partnerships will no longer be enacted if this passes. People who are currently Civil Partnered will remain so - they will not be automatically converted to being married - they must choose to do so legally. No new CPs will occur.

terrysgirl33 said:
It seems from this that there are people in many situations, couples (married and unmarried) and singletons who are adopting.
Click to expand...

I am not fully au fait with the new Family Bill that was enacted. But there are (were) many situations where adoption was possible. A married couple could adopt, a single person could adopt (despite sexual orientation - Although only 2 gay men have applied in the last 10 years(?) to do so). A gay couple could apply to foster a child together - but a gay couple could not adopt as they are not married.

This has had bigger implications in families - for many reasons a gay/lesbian person may have a child (previous relationship, IVF etc). The 2nd parent was never able to adopt that child and had no rights of guardianship.

terrysgirl33 said:
I wonder as well, is there a difference in public perception between homosexual couples that are female-female and male-male.
Click to expand...

There certainly is a bias against gay men and children. In my own circumstances - I was a volunteer in Special Olympics Ireland - and I was very protective of myself. A gay man who is shown to be caring to children or people of impaired ability is often viewed with suspicion. A woman in the same circumstance is implicitly trusted. Our society is definitely skewed to believe that women are the best and most natural carers. Obviously this is not always the case.
 
Sol28 said:
There certainly is a bias against gay men and children. In my own circumstances - I was a volunteer in Special Olympics Ireland - and I was very protective of myself. A gay man who is shown to be caring to children or people of impaired ability is often viewed with suspicion. A woman in the same circumstance is implicitly trusted. Our society is definitely skewed to believe that women are the best and most natural carers. Obviously this is not always the case.
Click to expand...
Statistically it is heterosexual men who abuse children,
That said there's a bias against men generally when it comes to children.
 
First of all Sol28, thanks for the replies! I am going to vote yes anyway, unless something truly awful comes out. There seems no real reason not to let people enter into same sex marriages.

I didn't realise how proscribed adoption is, from citizensinformation.ie:

The following persons are eligible to adopt:

  • A married couple living together.
  • A married person alone. The other spouse's consent to adopt must be obtained unless the couple is living apart and separated under a court decree or a deed of separation, or the other spouse has deserted the prospective adoptive parent or the other spouse's conduct has resulted in the prospective adoptive parent, with just cause, leaving the other spouse.
  • The mother, father or relative of the child (relative meaning a grandparent, brother, sister, uncle or aunt of the child and/or the spouse of any such person, the relationship to the child being traced through the mother or the father).
  • A widow or widower.
  • A sole applicant who is not in one of the categories listed above may only adopt where the Adoption Authority is satisfied that, in the particular circumstances of the case, it is desirable. It is not possible for two unmarried persons to adopt jointly.
There are no legal upper age limits for adopting parents.

On the men with vulnerable people (children and vulnerable adults), that is more than suspicion of gay men (though I imagine it is several degrees worse if you are in that category). My husband is a SAHD to our three girls (now all in primary school), and there have been many situations he has been wary in, mother-and-baby get togethers, other children coming over on playdates. I don't think anything was ever explicitly said, but he would be wary of putting himself in a position that looks bad, and he gets a feeling from other parents sometimes. He has done a great job taking care of our kids.
 
Purple said:
That said there's a bias against men generally when it comes to children.
Click to expand...

terrysgirl33 said:
I don't think anything was ever explicitly said, but he would be wary of putting himself in a position that looks bad, and he gets a feeling from other parents sometimes.
Click to expand...

Agree with both of the points here - there is an absolute bias against men in charge of children. Men who are looking after children - especially other people's children have to conduct themselves in such a way that there cannot be any confusion. Its a sad state of affairs. And in this referendum the No lobby groups are exploiting that nervousness.
 
As an aside to all the political debating here and in other media.

I have to admit that I am having to choke back the tears on an almost daily basis as I see so many people, businesses, politicians all finally stating that they accept that I am an equal member of society and should be treated as such. People who, 10 years ago, would most likely have dismissed me at best, at worst would have down right opposed me, are some of the strongest allies of the LGBT community.

Thanks to all those who have taken the journey so far.
 
Sol28 said:
As an aside to all the political debating here and in other media.

I have to admit that I am having to choke back the tears on an almost daily basis as I see so many people, businesses, politicians all finally stating that they accept that I am an equal member of society and should be treated as such. People who, 10 years ago, would most likely have dismissed me at best, at worst would have down right opposed me, are some of the strongest allies of the LGBT community.

Thanks to all those who have taken the journey so far.
Click to expand...
It's a shame the journey had to be taken at all.

I do agree that attitudes have changed.

I’ve infected my children with my “liberal” views and my oldest boy (16) said that most of his friends agree with him.

I was never able to understand why someone could have a problem with someone else based on their colour or sexual orientation. I remember being 13 or 14 and friends talking about “queers”. I just didn’t see the big deal about being gay but I wasn’t in the majority.
Back then people started out bigoted and with age, maturity and experience of the world they tempered or changed their views. There is a younger generation now which is starting off far less bigoted and racist than mine and mine was far less bigoted and racist than the one that came before me.


I for one am proud of how our country is changing and has changed. I’ll be more proud on the 22nd of next month if and when a group of my fellow citizens finally have the same rights that I have.
 
Seem to note that the No campaign has started to use the term "bullying" an awful lot in the last few days. Any specific examples of "bullying" to which they refer?
 
Can people stop referring to the Children and Family Relationships "Bill"? It's an Act, signed by the President into law (you know, like all other ACTS).

[broken link removed]

It's another No campaign scare tactic to pretend that it is not an Act, so they can continue to spread lies about its POTENTIAL impact. It will have an impact regardless of whether the referendum on MARRIAGE is passed or not.
 
dereko1969 said:
Can people stop referring to the Children and Family Relationships "Bill"? It's an Act, signed by the President into law (you know, like all other ACTS).

[broken link removed]

It's another No campaign scare tactic to pretend that it is not an Act, so they can continue to spread lies about its POTENTIAL impact. It will have an impact regardless of whether the referendum on MARRIAGE is passed or not.
Click to expand...

Facts and the repeated statement of fact have no place in this debate.
 
dereko1969 said:
Can people stop referring to the Children and Family Relationships "Bill"? It's an Act, signed by the President into law (you know, like all other ACTS).
Click to expand...
Yes, it is an Act but it hasn't commenced. Section 1 providdes that various sections of the Act shall come into effect only when the relevant Minister has signed a commencement order, and a quick look at the statutory instruments for 2015 doesn't show any to date. http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2015/statutory.html. So it's impact is potential and ministers are unlikey to commence it until the results of the referendum is known.
 
PMU said:
Yes, it is an Act but it hasn't commenced. Section 1 providdes that various sections of the Act shall come into effect only when the relevant Minister has signed a commencement order, and a quick look at the statutory instruments for 2015 doesn't show any to date. http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2015/statutory.html. So it's impact is potential and ministers are unlikey to commence it until the results of the referendum is known.
Click to expand...
You do know that virtually every Act has a commencement section? More speaking out of both sides of the mouth from No supporters. The result of the referendum will have no impact on the provisions or commencement of the Act.
 
I didn't see this, but I did have a discussion with my DH about it. On Vincent Browne last night there was a debate on marriage equality, which ended up being more about surrogacy and adoption, I believe. Apparently reference was made to a court case where a married couple with a child split up, the wife entered into a second relationship (marriage?), she died and the new husband had more rights to keep the child than the father of the child. Does anyone know the details of the court case referenced? Like I said, I didn't see the programme and it sounds 'off' to me.

Reference to the programme here: http://theliberal.ie/gay-marriage-h...bate-leads-to-row-over-gay-adoptionsurrogacy/
 
terrysgirl33 said:
I didn't see this, but I did have a discussion with my DH about it. On Vincent Browne last night there was a debate on marriage equality, which ended up being more about surrogacy and adoption, I believe. Apparently reference was made to a court case where a married couple with a child split up, the wife entered into a second relationship (marriage?), she died and the new husband had more rights to keep the child than the father of the child. Does anyone know the details of the court case referenced? Like I said, I didn't see the programme and it sounds 'off' to me.

Reference to the programme here: http://theliberal.ie/gay-marriage-h...bate-leads-to-row-over-gay-adoptionsurrogacy/
Click to expand...

Its an interesting topic - But this has nothing to do with this discussion. Above you are talking about heterosexual families and children's rights. Unfortunately the No side have been clouding the debates by referencing completely unrelated topics (such as surrogacy).

Whether or not this referendum passes or fails there will no be impact on any of the surrogacy, adoption or fathers rights issues that may already exist.
 
Sol28 said:
Its an interesting topic - But this has nothing to do with this discussion. Above you are talking about heterosexual families and children's rights. Unfortunately the No side have been clouding the debates by referencing completely unrelated topics (such as surrogacy).

Whether or not this referendum passes or fails there will no be impact on any of the surrogacy, adoption or fathers rights issues that may already exist.
Click to expand...

I agree that the only effect it has is that it brings same sex couples into the debate as well as other couples. However, I'm wondering if anyone knows the details of the case referred to?

ETA: I am guessing about the sexes of the people involved, it does seem to be the scenario that paints the biological father as the loser in all this.
 
Decided to read the refcom.ie site. This is purely factual and simply cites current law and the proposed amendment. Article 41 is worth a read. It is all about the centrality of the "family" to social order and our society. Marriage is about the family. Take just one line:
Article 41 said:
In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.

The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.
Click to expand...
Much more in this vein.

I think a very simplistic option is being put forward in this referendum. A more honest approach would be to provide a completely rewritten Article 41. For example, the following addendum to the above clauses would be needed to provide clarity. Should a marriage be between people of the same sex and should they decide to have a family then one of them should nominate themselves as the "woman" and moreover the woman shall be deemed to be the "mother".

Let's get real. This is all a total nonsense. Any such honest attempt to truly make same sex marriage identical to normal marriage in the eyes of the constitution would risk certain defeat and stop the inexorable rush to political correctness.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top