So Mike, the government has to give 100% of it’s attention to economy does it? Nothing else gets done until we sort out this mess? Is that how this country should be run, one problem at a time?

She thinks Leo will be very happy with the news.

Lucinda Creighton’s still waiting to be told what to think on this one!!

The great effort to see it through involved not notifying members about the motion in advance. So much for “democracy”…

Although not present for the vote (not being a FG member or supporter) I presume no one was coerced or forced against their will to support the motion. So your point is invalid. Perhaps David or anyone else who attended the Ard Fheis could confirm this for us.

Everyone could get a copy of the schedule on their way in, which included where and when the motions would be proposed and voted on. Ok, you had to look through the motions and find the same sex marriage one but with so many motions, all they can do is give everyone the information and let people decide if they show up or not.

Nothing happened against people’s will and it’s a stupid thing to suggest. I would mention that besides the YFG member (Mark O’Meara, also from Trinity branch) who spoke for it, Catherine Byrne TD also spoke eloquently about gay rights in her closing remarks as someone on the panel and Minister Alan Shatter said that there wasn’t a motion amongst the list that he would reject. (effectively endorsing this motion)

So there was a good mood for it there but in any case people in the room had a free vote and a clear majority of them voted FOR this motion!

That’s what I thought David. And again, very positive result.

Can I then have the pleasure in assuaging your cynicism and reassuring you that this is a result of a genuine desire to introduce equality and fair treatment in the laws of the state.

I am being accused of having archaic views yet all I have stated is that the discrimination highlighted by the Childrens Ombudsman in relation to Children can be dealt with by legislation a point you agreed with and secondly that the European Court on Human Rights found that same sex marriages is not a Human Right- a very recent decision. There was no intention on my part to ‘insult’ though the same cannot be said of you.
I repeat let us debate the issues .

I didn’t see any insults or ad-hominems…

@ Michael O’ Dowd

You come on a public forum using your ststus as a public representative no less and disingenuously seek to claim that a referendum on marriage equality is unnecessary because one aspect ( albeit an important one) of what advocates are looking to address could be covered through legislation. This is to deliberately cloud the issue. You further claim in a somewhat sneering manner that some will find the ECHR position (which you have chosen to selectively interpret) “inconvenient”. You also seem to think that simply declaring yourself not to be anti-gay is enough to buffer you from any criticism, despite clearly believing that we as gay people are not entitled to equality in our relationships, both in practical and symbolic terms.

I don’t believe you are interested in a serious debate on these issues Cllr O’Dowd. And furthermore, I think your hang- ups about being insulted are ridiculous. You are a public rep articulating a view that a section of that public should be excluded from marrying their loved one simply becsuse they are of the same-sex. As a gay man, I regard that as deeply objectionable and fundamentally unfair.

I believe most Irish people are decent and fairminded and support equality for their gay friends, family members and fellow citizens. And I’m confident that if a referendum is indeed necessary to change the law in this respect, that will be reflected in the result.

And as someone so keen to engage with the issues, Cllr O’Dowd, I’m you will have no problem then addressing the points put to you by a number of contributors, something you have so far failed to do.

Come out of the closet? if you used that phrase on purpose then well done!

Once I get this fire lit i’ll be all over it :)

Chuck, that’s why I stuck in the :)

I love the illogical comment above where because the “country is on it’s knees” we should ignore people’s basic rights, i.e. the right to marry. Can one of these low IQ types not consider how they would feel if someone told them they couldn’t marry the person they love because of the edicts some 2000 year old cult.

I couldn’t agree more David. In many ways, I find this whole debate similar to the one that occurred back in the 1980s around ending the horrible legal definition of ‘illegitimate’ children. All children and families deserve to be treated with equality and respect under the law, regardless of the sexual orientation or gender make up of the couples and parents.

Totally agree with you David on this.

@Michael O’Dowd

Stating the current legislative situation governing marriage adds nothing to the debate – I am only too well aware of the fact that we, as gay people, are currently prevented from marrying in Ireland as the law is currently understood. However, marriage has evolved throughout history and more and more countries are rightly opening up civil marriage to same-sex couples. Ireland too will enact this reform, on the sound basis of providing equality for gay couples and their families. No one will be harmed by extending marriage rights to same-sex couples, yet many stand to benefit. You may disagree, but that does not give you the right to enforce your particular moral views on me and others in the LGBT community. And I repeat – I find it very disappointing that someone in your position is seeking to deny rights to some of your constituents rather than embracing their justified demands to be treated with equality under the law – nothing more, nothing less. I’m only glad that yours appears to be the minority view in the country.

The fact is, most people no longer accept the increasingly archaic view that gay couples should be excluded from marriage, and the political and societal consensus fast emerging around this human rights issue is most welcome.

@Mike Scott

Have just turned on laptop to have a read of ‘journal.ie’ Mike, unfortunately, I don’t see my messages here on this thread, I don’t know why. I cannot remember your message nor mine. Could you remind me please? TKS.

Sounds like you are annoyed with me? I have someone very close to me. He is 18 years old. He told me that he was close to taking his life last year because he didn’t know how to tell his parents that he was gay. His mother always thought that they were really close and always talked about ‘things’ when he was younger. She could not understand how she didn’t know that he was gay. Thankfully he did tell them with the love and strength of his sister he told them. It’s better now and they love him even more, if that’s possible. To me people are born in many ways. It’s nobodys fault. It’s the way they were formed in the womb. Many things happen within the womb and nobody can change that. This young chap is a wonderful, sensitive, loving person. I thank God every day that he’s here.

I am so sorry to hear about your little brother. It is so sad to see that people like him find it so hard to tell someone, they are so scared of what people/family might think. I hope you find the strength to go on and live and remember your brother as being a lovely human being.

Has to be discussed at some stage,to alot of people it is a very important issue.

nonsense? this is highly important to the 230 children being raised in same sex families with no legal relationship with one of their parents. fair enough civil partnership has covered most of the tax basis but legal relationships between non biological parents and children are still in legal limbo much like illegitimate children and parental relationships were in the past

Then stop having sex with them :D

(and what better way than to marry them?)

The ‘I’m not homophobic but..’ line of argument cuts no ice with me Cllr O’ Dowd.

Believing that I and others who are gay should be discriminated against in law and denied rights that others take for granted is the real insult here.

I’m just glad a majority of your fellow party members appear to be more enlightened and compassionate on the issue, along with 73% of the rest of society.

As an Editorial in the hardly radical UK Times put it recently – Gay rights are not now, if ever they were, something on which reasonable people may differ.

Yes that could be done by amending existing legislation and it was wrong to exclude the rights of children being raised by same-sex couples from the Civil Partnership legislation.

As regards marriage equality, the current legal understanding is that a referendum will be required to intoduce it, although that view is currently being challenged in the Supreme Court in the Zappone case.

In any event, as a gay man, I’m very confident of seeing marriage equality becoming a reality sooner rather than later. The momentum is clearly on the side of equality.

It could be, but is there any good reason that a gay couple should not be allowed to marry? If marriage is a good thing, and I believe it is, why not allow it for all? The couple themselves would benefit, as would the children raised in such a relationship.

Why not take a lead for a change.The EU can follow us instead of us following them,its not a novel idea remember the smoking ban.

You’re right Norman and many member states are already moving ahead on marriage equality without reference to the ECHR, just like most European countries did not have to wait for a ruling from the ECHR striking down laws criminalising homosexuality to do the right thing.

Significantly, the UK will have marriage equality in place during this Parliament and in France, Francois Hollande, who is widely expected to become President next month, has vowed to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples, which, as in Ireland, is supported by a strong majority of voters.

That’s very misleading, Michael. The ECHR has ruled that gay marriage is not a right contained under the convention, not that it is not a human right full stop. It’s also misleading because the ECHR uses a doctrine called the margin of appreciation when it comes to issues like this such that over time the court may decide that gay marriage is a right contained by the convention, depending on the consensus amongst member states. For example, the court had ruled previously that transgender people did not have certain rights under the convention, but have since pointed to a growing consensus amongst member states as the basis for recognising additional rights.

Stop hiding behind such decisions Michael. Get off the pot and tell us what ‘you’ think. Do you believe that same-sex couples should have the right to marry each other?

Yes because as a society we are incapable of dealing with more than one issue…