Today's article, by a Victoria White, who is new to me, cause me much myrth just now when I read it, "it", having just being re-tweeted by David Quinn.
I won't go into the finer detail, which is a bit of a rant about the Constitutional Convention not knowing who some obscure "women in the home" orginisation was, and wanting it to be gender neutral, as the Women's Council and the Iona institute wish for, etc etc.
Of course, the vast thust of the piece concentrates on the, aparrent, deserved special position of the woman in the home, and, in the third last paragraph, has the usual right wing rant about "feminists" and forcing people out of the home to work if they don't want to go. Notwithstanding the hysteronics involved, there is one, simple, basic, legal point that would have saved her ink and what brain power went into writing the article. It is this.
Article 41.2 has, NO LEGAL EFFECT WHATSOEVER. It's purely aspirational and cannot be litigated.
If it is of assistance, the seminal case, an equity matter, is, L v L  2 IR 77. The Supreme Court held that the article was simply a statetment of principle, that it was for the legislature to flesh it out and that the article gave rise to NO ENFORCABLE RIGHT against the State whatsoever.
Now, any 1st year law student, if she had been minded to show it to them, would pointed out that glaring fact to the author and saved us all the vague bother of being confronted by such a piece of nonsense.