We have divorce. Heterosexual co-habiting couples have CHOSEN not to marry. That is their right.
They should not be given the advantages/disadvantages of being married. This bill is an administrative nightmare from the point of view of heterosexual co-habiting couples.
We do need to address via legislation the issue of co-habiting homosexual couples.
This bill is being presented as giving "rights" to people; what it is also doing, as has been pointed out in this thread, is giving some people responsibilities (rights and responsibilities tend to go together).
It's interesting that the woman (as it usually is) when a heterosexual couple separate is presented as some sort of victim if she didn't work for a period during the relationship. However, give most women the choice whether they'd like to reverse roles, with her having to earn enough to support the couple (or family) and the man staying at home, and I'd believe one would find that she'd prefer to stay at home. Or indeed, if it was a case that the man would still work, in many cases the woman would still prefer to stay at home and be a "kept woman" than work.
Of course, if there was "Men's Studies" courses the way there are "Women's Studies" courses (which also influence gender studies courses, sociology courses, family law courses, etc), some of these issues might be brought up more often.
Last edited by belvoboy; 27th June 2009 at 11:44 AM.
I think you may be closer to the truth than you think.....Originally Posted by constitutionus
@OP
OMG that is the most stupid fecking thing I've ever heard. This government is dense.
*************, *********, ********, **** <3 USA
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
This has been through at least 4 committees and shows every sign of it.
If the banks are out for a bail,
and Lenny's efforts end up as a fail,
when the Somer does come,
to the Country they'll run,
And leave a Fine mess for the Gael.
Endinf the one Party (FF) state:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Labour should vote against this and introduce a private member's bill. The only thing they need to tiptoe around is the Constitutional primacy of the nuclear family, which I would bet considerable amounts of money the Supreme Court will continue to classify as one with a mother, a father and their children.
Seeing as the mess isn't likely to come before either House before Christmas, they should jump the gun and introduce it in Sept/Oct, when the deputies blindly grope their way back to an unfamiliar Leinster House after the long summer break. Then the government would have something coherent to work off when they adopt it themselves. Would be even better if Lab and FG collaborated on one over the summer. If FG can publicly row in behind a proper piece of legislation for gay marriage by another name, FF certainly should be able to.
"Unless you are an absolute pacifist, then you acknowledge that there are times when taking up arms is appropriate."
- cactusflower
I shared an apartment with the same girl in Dublin for 3 1/2 years. We weren't a couple, just happened to be sharing the apartment. And yet under the terms of that, she could have made my life hell after three years if she'd decided to fraudulently claim we had been a couple.
I can understand the case where there are kids involved, but otherwise, what need is there for this legislation?
My political compass
Economic Left/Right: 0.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36
That is a critical point - once two non-related adults live together it is possible that a claim can be made against one of them (indeed they need not even be of the opposite sex) by the other. Genuine or fraudulent. Boom time for family lawyers.
If the banks are out for a bail,
and Lenny's efforts end up as a fail,
when the Somer does come,
to the Country they'll run,
And leave a Fine mess for the Gael.
Endinf the one Party (FF) state:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I believe they have a similar system in Australia. If you shack up with a bird for a few years she's automatically entitled to half, that's HALF of your house, salary, etc. if you separate, oops sorry, split up. Can you imagine the puffs when they split up? Handbags at dawn. Ho, ho.
At a guess, I would be certain that this Act is not going affect you in any way.
If the banks are out for a bail,
and Lenny's efforts end up as a fail,
when the Somer does come,
to the Country they'll run,
And leave a Fine mess for the Gael.
Endinf the one Party (FF) state:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote