Originally Posted by David Cochrane

Sorry, but hang on here. If Gilmore's support for gay marriage was explicit he'd have had the Gov get itself together, get a bill and get it put before the people with the support of SF, FF and pretty much everyone else.

FG are making slow moves towards getting down with the gays, they've recently setup an gay group within the party and Ministers are (slowly) saying they're in favour.

But it doesn't matter what Enda Kenny thinks in this matter, it'd be great (or not, if you're David Quinn) for Kenny to come out in support of gay marriage, but this is being banged off to the constitutional convention. Fine Gael are hardly going to come out against the idea, they're still the most socially conservative of any of the political parties, this convention appears to me to be the best means of getting the referendum out there, without forcing people who should be allowed to hold personal/political views to actually be forced to appear to be against something.

So, Gilmore's in favour, that's fine, it's awesome, but what's he going to do? Let someone else do it.

Really? FG is the most socially conservative party? Garret was the man behind the liberal crusade. FG put forward the first referenda on divorce and attempted to tackle abortion. I know that was a number of years ago but have things changed much since then?

I would have thought that most Irish parties were as socially liberal or conservative as each other. They would all have their progessive element and also their religious nut element.

Originally Posted by statsman

If a change to the constitution is required, and it almost certainly is, then a referendum is the only way to proceed. A referendum in which this question is not turned into a party political football would be the only sensible way to proceed.

But the constitution doesn't define marriage and the Supreme Court has never ruled it to be unconstitutional, so why would we need a constitutional amendment to facilitate it?

Originally Posted by White Horse

Same-sex marriage is not a burning issue but it will be considered in the context of a wide review of the Constitution.

While I doubt that Kenny is privately supportive of it, it is quite possible that the people will be asked whether they want to endorse extending marriage to same sex couples as part of a referendum.

My conclusion is that Kenny is likely to facilitate the public deciding on the matter rather than supoorting or advocating a change.

In or around 10% of the population in most countries in the world where gays are not discriminated against by the law are homosexual or bi-sexual. Even though there is a liberal regime, homophobia is still rife so the number of closet homosexuals and bi-sexual would push that percentage much higher. I'm quite sure they there are hundreds of thousands of people in this country who are living in utter misery and starved of the love and companionship they really desire. Making gay marriage legal and allowing gays to adopt children will surely go some way to lifting the sinister blanket of sexual repression that persists in Ireland.

Originally Posted by Hooch

This is about same-sex couples being able to raise a family with the same legal protections as their heterosexual counterparts, that is important to gay couples across the entire socio-economic spectrum.

A far higher number of Gay couples see inheritence, pensions, hospital visitation (next of kin etc) as the most pressing items. I cannot see why others would want to deny these basic human rights to any social group. We live in a society where theoretically an estranged family could deny access to the lifelong partner of their dying relative if they chose.

I see the muddle of Irish traditions clouding this issue. When the word marriage is mentioned almost everyone in Ireland thinks of Church, whereas is most other countries the church and state marriages are quite seperate (mostly same day, however they can often be weeks apart should a person choose both ceremonies) - in most countries the clergyman cannot act as State Registrar.

The blending of the lines in Ireland leaves many people looking for their lead from the Church as opposed to applying reason.

Originally Posted by ScreeOrTalus

You say this as if it is a good thing; I don't think that it is.

There are same-sex couples raising children in Ireland right now, they have been for years but they are forced to go without the same legal protections that heterosexual couples do. Extending the right of marriage to these couples is in the best interest of the family unit and it would irresponsible for the Oireachtas to ignore their plight.

Kenny is already on record as being against "gay marriage". If he does a u-turn now, it will make him look (even more) ridiculous, as nothing has changed in the last couple of years.

Kenny has been clever enough not to speak on this (non-)issue and he'd be well advised to stick to that approach. The people of this country have REAL issues to worry about and Kenny and his government are doing a piss poor job on those.

Originally Posted by statsman

The 'right' to marriage is hardly a universal human right, is it? It's a civil/religious construct which varies wildly from society to society. In a referendum, I'd vote yes, but not because it was a human rights issue. I just feel that if you're going to have a civil institution of that nature it should be inclusive.

Preventing homosexuals from marrying institutionalizes discrimination and homophobia and legitimizes gay-bashing and bigotry in general.

Originally Posted by Keith-M

Kenny is already on record as being against "gay marriage". If he does a u-turn now, it will make him look (even more) ridiculous, as nothing has changed in the last couple of years.

Kenny has been clever enough not to speak on this (non-)issue and he'd be well advised to stick to that approach. The people of this country have REAL issues to worry about and Kenny and his government are doing a piss poor job on those.

Oh great Keith is here to try and pass off scornful quotation marks as debate.

Originally Posted by Hooch

But the constitution doesn't define marriage and the Supreme Court has never ruled it to be unconstitutional, so why would we need a constitutional amendment to facilitate it?

The constitution protects the 'family' and marriage within the context of 'the family' explicit in this is the role of the Mother in the family. For male same-sex marriage to constitute a family unit under the constitution, some adjustment to this is likely to be required, I imagine. I may well be wrong, but even if I am, I'd still prefer not to see same-sex marriage to become a party political football.

Originally Posted by Hitch 22

In or around 10% of the population in most countries in the world where gays are not discriminated against by the law are homosexual or bi-sexual. Even though there is a liberal regime, homophobia is still rife so the number of closet homosexuals and bi-sexual would push that percentage much higher. I'm quite sure they there are hundreds of thousands of people in this country who are living in utter misery and starved of the love and companionship they really desire. Making gay marriage legal and allowing gays to adopt children will surely go some way to lifting the sinister blanket of sexual repression that persists in Ireland.

Were you educated at the Frankfurt School?

Very Marcusian language in the part I've put in bold.