Great comment, liked the content but the mayo bashing was unnecessary :-/

I am Not a fan of FF, but if we were to go by what the ‘opposition’ says, then why haven’t FG sorted out at least one of their plans that Smarmy Kenny kept mentioning on the run up to the last election?!
I just don’t like/trust Enda Kenny!!!

Micheal Martin is the type of man that would push his own wife off her chair of the likes of Sean Fitzpatrick needed a seat. If he thinks that he can get one more vote, out of being for this, than against it, he’ll back it.

I believe the Supreme Court did make a ruling on marriage between the same sex couples Mark. Maybe the journal could confirm?

If the court did make a ruling then to change it we need a referendum to change that Supreme court finding.

Much as I hate to admit it Martin is correct and all this is a head of government unwilling to make a decision which may prove provoke some set of supporters to he is playing pass the parcel. Some leader…..

Kerry,
The ruling you refer to is probably that of the Zappone and Gilligan case, in which the court interpreted marriage, under Article 41 of the Constitution, as referring to heterosexual marriage.
The Constitution doesn’t actually say anything about homosexual vs. heterosexual marriage, but the court believed that those who wrote the Constitution would have intended it to refer to same-sex marriage only.
Since the Constitution was drafted under De Valera’s supervision, with input from Archbishop McQuaid, and was presented to the Vatican for the all-clear before it was enacted, it’s very hard to argue that those parties would have intended “marriage” to include same-sex unions.

The way Irish law works is that when a court makes a particular ruling on a particular issue, all the inferior courts have to follow that ruling. If the High Court decides in a certain way, the Circuit and District courts are not allowed to give judgements contrary to that in subsequent cases.

For same sex marriage to be constitutional without a referendum, another similar case would have to come before the Supreme Court in which the Supreme Court overturns the previous ruling. That is highly unlikely to occur.

Realistically the only way same-sex marriage can be constitutionally sound in this country is through a referendum.

Anyone who expects our taoiseach to give his opinion on this is deluded. Enda will sit on the fence, like he always does, trying to have no opinions and keep everyone happy. Enda backing into flowerpots is not a story, Enda does not and cannot talk to the media without memorising his pre-agreed speech with his overpaid advisors.

Exactly James, that is why I was also saying we need a referendum.

Enda’s afraid of being accused of being boring in bed if he admits to approving of same sex marriage…

Doesn’t the Good Friday Agreement guarantee equal rights for citizens north and south of the border? Gay people can marry in the North but not in the South, so therefore why is a referendum required?

@John T
For the reasons I have outlined above.

@ James – but isn’t the Good Friday Agreement written into the constitution, so it would trump the Supreme Court’s ruling? If two pieces of the constitution apparently disagree with each other then surely an amendment would trump the original intention?

Well the Good Friday Agreement doesn’t actually say that citizens of the North and the Republic must enjoy the same rights. It says that all citizens in Northern Ireland are entitled to equality and that if a United Ireland is ever brought about, that equality must be guaranteed.

In any case, an amendment guaranteeing the same rights for citizens of both jurisdictions could never have been introduced. It would have been in direct contravention with Art. 15.2 of the Constitution that no body other than the Oireachtas has the power to make laws for this State. (That’s why we have to have a referendum every time there is a new EU treaty – even the EU can’t make laws for us).

Guaranteeing equal rights for those North and South of the border would effectively have meant consolidating the Irish and British legal systems: we would have to have all of the exact same laws. It would be like having two parliaments making different laws for the same country. It could never work without Ireland re-entering the UK.

No he doesn’t have a duty to tell you how he thinks on a personal and very private matter of sexuality. How dare you insist that his fingernails be pulled until he or anyone else satisfies your prurient interest . I believe the Taoiseach is perfectly right not to surrender to those Gestapo like attitudes.nFor that matter perhaps Deputy Martin could tell us where he was on the night his Leader decided to issue a ruinous bank Guarantee Scheme and what did he know when…

It’s not a personal issue. It’s public policy. And he’s the leader of the Government who decides on public policy. Pretty sure that gives us a right to know.

Mark,christ man is FG a political party or a cult.We do have a right to know his position on this issue.Can he not answer for himself.Simple i agree with same sex marriage or i disagree,what’s the problem is he afraid of the Grey vote,in case you or he didn’t know he is paid to represent all the citizens of the 26 counties.

the main reason why is that its like voting on whether you think we should discriminate. clearly, any answer here that says yes is not one that a reasonable society or government should legislate for without a very high judicial treshold

Norman..the next questions he will be asked is whether he believes the provision of abortion is a human right and on and on and on. If he doesn’t wish to answer please advise what obligation exists to do so.

Norman ..could you please leave Christ out of it?n

Mark if he doesn’t want to be in a position where is required to give his position on a topic,i would suggest he quits public life.As for using the word “christ” i use it as a turn of phrase.But as i said earlier do ye guys in FG veiw yourselves as a cult or political party because this blind idol worship of enda is frankly distrubing.He is human,has he no opinion on anything,does it all have to be scripted for him.We had the” teflon “taoiseach,now we have the “plastic” taoiseach pull his cord and listen to pre-loaded phrase’s.

kingstown, that was in the proclamation, not the constitution. if only we could switch them!

Pity – although it explains why equality Only applies fully if you’re white, catholic and male

The Constitution was never much of a guarantor of equality.

Art. 40 says that all citizens are “equal before the law”, although “before the law” only means that the existing laws apply equally to everyone – it says nothing about laws having to guarantee equal rights.

Art. 44 provides that the State will not endow any religion, although the same article originally recognised the “special position” of the Catholic Church and recognised the existence of a number of other specified religions.
Art. 44 still provides that “the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God” and that his name will be held in reverence. This discriminates against those without any religion.

Despite the guarantee not to endow any religion, the preamble to the Constitution acknowledges “our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ”.

Art. 41 still talks about a woman’s “life within the home”, referring to her “support without which the common good cannot be achieved”.
Art. 41 also states that “mothers shall not be obliged through economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home”.
I’m not sure if that last one discriminates against women by giving them “duties within the home” or against men by not guaranteeing that they should not have to work outside the home either…

@James: It discriminates against both, implying that women belong in the home and men belong out at work. Perish the thought that a father might want to stay at home with his kids and a mother might enjoy her job!

Why not put the man to a stake and light a fire under him to see how his thinking and moral compass behaves. Do please take a look at your pathetic wish to run a man down because he thinks that it would be better as Taoiseach not to give a response before the Constitutional Reform Committee do their work.

@Darren Delaney,

That’s fine. But there should be a lot of debating about same sex marriages before the referendum also. So all can hopefully understand other people and their feelings and their beliefs for their life.

Nothing is black and white in this world. Nobody has a right to judge others unless that person is a criminal and needs to be punished. But good, honest folk deserve to be heard and deserve the right to live the life they have on loan on this earth so others can understand that it’s not just ‘their’ rights and beliefs that should be look after, it’s everybody in this world.

If I’m understanding you right Sheila, you mean that there should be a referendum in order to give homophobes an opportunity to try and persuade everyone else. So that we can ‘understand their feelings’ because it’s not ‘black and white’.

I can’t say I agree.

Personally, I think there *should* be a new constitutional clause to put define marriage as being between two consenting adults of whatever gender to ensure marriage equality. And, inevitably, having to put up with ill informed viewpoints will be a part of that process. But to give such people their day in the sun – a brief period where, due to equal time requirements, they can wallow one last time in the impression of being a significant group – should not be the *reason* for a referendum rather than normal legislation.

Because this IS a black and white, very simple and straight forward moral issue.

When we introduced legislation that criminalized rape within marriage in 1990 (prior to that it was technically legal for a man to rape his own wife) we just did it! We didn’t hold a referendum just so that those ‘good, honest folk’ who believed in the supposed ‘marital right’ to intercourse could have their say. And in 1989, when we criminalized incitement to hatred on the basis of race, gender, religion or sexual orientation, we didn’t put THAT to a referendum either, just so the ‘good, honest folk’ could defend their ‘belief’ in their ‘right’ that gay people were *deserving* of abuse.

@Peter Nolan,

It should definitely be brought into Irish law. What I was trying to say was, that these people with very closed minds (homophobes) have to be shown that there are many reasons why this should be made law. Ever since the beginning of time there were homsexuals. These people have to learn by listening to others opinions and beliefs. They have to listen to the young people of this country because this country will be theirs not mine or the ‘homophobes’. People like myself who feel that all are/should be equal have to help them to understand that what they believe in can’t over ride what I, you, homosexuals and many heterosexuals believe.

It’s by talking about subjects like this that will help these people (homophobes) to understand and accept others. I feel there should be many debates, by our young and by many older homosexuals to let us, everyone know what their life was like when it was against the law in Ireland. Homosexuals don’t choose to be gay. It’s in them from birth. These people (homophobes) have to understand that homosexuality is here to stay.

Sorry, I misunderstood.

However, I’m not sure that having to *justify* the right to marry the person you love should be a requirement.

I think this excellent campaign ad from MarriageEquality pretty much sums up my feelings:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ULdaSrYGLQ

The sooner it is made and put into law, the better. It’ll be just the norm of everyday life in Ireland, all equal. Soon, there will be so many different kinds of families in Ireland and the world. The old way, which a lot of religions think is right and which is ‘man made’, will soon be one of many types of families in the world.

The future should and I hope will be better for our children, for the human race. Yes, the human race will go on forever, until the end, which is not tomorrow or in our lifetime. There will always be children born in the world, there will always be heterosexual marriages as well as others. Here’s to the future of the world…to the human race.

Somebody needs to come out of the closet :)

Either that or someone needs classes in Trolling 101.

Eh…. IT IS NORMAL!! trust me ya can’t pray the gay away!! Ive said three hail Mary’s and he still won’t get out of my bed!!

You do know we’ve had marriage between men and women since the foundation of the state, right? I’ve yet to see anyone proposing ‘pedophile rights’ and ‘pedophile pride’ for men who abuse young girls, or women who abuse young boys.

What’s up with that. eh? It’s almost… almost like there’s absolutely no link between healthy, consensual relationship between adults and child abuse.

(And by the way it’s ALREADY illegal to incite hatred against gay people — has been since 1990. And it IS perfectly natural and normal to be gay so it’s a good thing schools *already* teach that, isn’t it? In fact, there’s currently a big push – perhaps you weren’t paying attention – to help homosexual teens understand that homophobes are the ones with the problem not them, )

Why shouldn’t two consenting adults who are in love be able to have that legally recognised if they wish?

It’s a far cry from pedophilia, which involves forcing sex upon a CHILD who is not capable of giving consent.
Nor is it anything like bestiality for the same reason (because that’s the other slippery slope fallacy you homophobes like to employ).

You see there’s this little thing called logic that’s completely absent from your argument. Instead you have indulged in so many fallacies that I don’t know where to start..

You clearly have no idea what the significance of the Pride event is.. It’s because of prejudiced individuals like yourself that it even exists.. If we didn’t have homophobic people, there would be no need for Pride..

Why shouldn’t we see homosexuals as normal anyway? We’re forced to accept that people like you are..

@Amhlaoibh – are you for real ??? Is MY Civil Partnership affecting you IS IT ???? Get a life but I guess you dont even have one coz only a fool would partner themselves with you……..if only closed minds came with closed mouths >:-<

@MacCana
Do you listen to what you say or do you just drift in and out? Really! Have you found many Christmas presents deep in your closet or are you really so ignorant as to believe that a persons RIGHT to be straight/bi/gay will have anything directly to do with the ‘end of the world?’
Hitler loved Pu55y and millions of people still died. Doesn’t do your theory any good now does it. Have you every heard of the incitement to hatred act? Youre sailing pretty close to the wind there.

OMG! How sad you are … Open your eyes!

OMG! Open your eyes! This is a Catholic church law and you talk about pedophile’s … Look at the Catholic church and other religious orders around the Globe .. What they have done to children …

No really, you’ve all just been trolled.

Pick up a newspaper, a case has already been brought, the KAL case. Judges have repeatedly referred to the constitutional definition of marriage. There’s only one level of courts left in that case and it will probably rule the same. If it does, a referendum to amend the constitution will be required.

bringing a case is one thing (assuming you can afford that, or can transcend the hurdles of disadvantage to begin to assert your so called rights), having the money or time or optimism to appeal is another, and finding justice is yet another still. kafka wrote a story: ‘at the door of the law’ that could have been describing this country