LGBT Noise are holding a protest next Saturday December 6th in Dublin at 13:45pm. The time is a strange one to have a protest isn't it, why not 13:30 or 14:00 makes it easier to remember. Anyway the protest is from the Dáil to the Civil Registry Office on Grand Canal Street "to stand up for the Civil Institution of Marriage". This is according to an email I got from their info list.
In the email about the protest LGBT Noise complain about "threats by Cardinal Seán Brady of legal challenges to the recognition of gay and lesbian couples"
This may be news to LGBT Noise but the church, as a legal entity, have the right to bring legal challenges against actions they might see as impinging on the Constitution. Gay activists always amaze me, they are the first to use the courts if they think it will further there cause (KAL Case) but if they see at something that might hold back there cause, its just not cricket.
Secondly they complain about "ideological attacks on gay families on RTE One and RTE Radio One" if they think that shouldn't they be writing to RTÉ and the papers? A protest on Civil Marriage is not going to change anything about who RTÉ gets on its shows.
They go on to say "gay and lesbian people have a civil right to have their relationships, and their families, protected by the State". While this is correct to a point the Irish Constitution the supreme law of the land states, in Article 41.1
1° The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.
2° The State, therefore, guarantees to protect the Family in its constitution and authority, as the necessary basis of social order and as indispensable to the welfare of the Nation and the State.
Also Article 41.3.1 states:
The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.
This shows the constitutions places limits on supposed Civil Rights.
A lot of Civil Rights being claimed by LGBT Noise such as:
Civil Marriage is a Civil Right.
Protection for parents is a Civil Right.
Protection for children is a Civil Right.
have not been validated by the Irish Constitution or by the courts. They are presuming that these rights exist. In fact we are waiting for a Children's Rights Referendum so I am surprised that they have mentioned Protection for Children which is a bit off track in that sense.
In relation to the threat by the church over legal action they say:
It's time that our government and the religious lobby recognised that church and state should remain separate. The right of gay and lesbian couples to get married in a civil registry office does not in any way interfere with the free practice of religion.
Who said it would interfere with "the free practice of religion"? Not a single person I know would use the argument of free practice of religion against the campaign for Civil Marriage as it wouldn't have a leg to stand on. I think the fact the Church is threatening to take the State to court shows that there is separation of Church and State in this country, because if it were not the case, the church would not have to take the case against the state.
In the entire email I find myself agreeing with only one part of it and that is one of the lines in the concluding paragraph
pretending that we must only see the arguments in terms of conflict between gay and religious people ignores both the countless gay people of faith, and others in the faith community who support equality for all
Yes, there are many religous folk out there in support of Gay Marriage and Civil Unions and I have been lucky to meet some of them.
Anyway best of luck to those attending the protest, but personally I don't see the point.
Quite a lot of ignorance and naiveté on show here, Stephen!
ReplyDeleteI went to this protest and had a great time - enjoyed the speeches in particular - so I was surprised to come across this.
"This may be news to LGBT Noise but the church, as a legal entity, have the right to bring legal challenges against actions they might see as impinging on the Constitution."
Not quite the point, is it? Having the right to do something does not make doing it 'right'. They'd also have the legal right to bring a challenge to equal pay provisions for women. Would they be right to do so?
Secondly they complain about "ideological attacks on gay families on RTE One and RTE Radio One" if they think that shouldn't they be writing to RTÉ and the papers
Didn't you get the call for complaints about this on the Noise info list aswell? I did. And it was all over the online fora too.
This shows the constitutions places limits on supposed Civil Rights.
Where? No limits are mentioned in the passages you quote, and even a cursory reading would show that they grant constitutional rights to 'the family'. That fairly covers civil rights for parents and children - or do you interpret 'family' differently?
have not been validated by the Irish Constitution or by the courts. They are presuming that these rights exist.
See the recent 'de facto family' case from the High Court (under appeal, but still in force) and last(?) year's 'brother's ex' case which in no uncertain terms found marriage to be a civil right.
Who said it would interfere with "the free practice of religion"?
Can you think of any other valid reason for the Church to challenge partnership in the courts?
Anyway best of luck to those attending the protest, but personally I don't see the point
Maybe you should try harder. Social change doesn't happen on its own.
Firstly thanks for the comment and secondly, Glad you enjoyed the protest.
ReplyDeleteRight to the points you raise
Not quite the point, is it? Having the right to do something does not make doing it 'right'. They'd also have the legal right to bring a challenge to equal pay provisions for women. Would they be right to do so?
This is exactly the point I am making. I am not saying they are right to bring the case, but they have a right to do it. In relation to equal pay, that is european legislation which actually overrides our constitution.
Didn't you get the call for complaints about this on the Noise info list aswell? I did. And it was all over the online fora too.
Strangely enough I didnt.
Where? No limits are mentioned in the passages you quote, and even a cursory reading would show that they grant constitutional rights to 'the family'. That fairly covers civil rights for parents and children - or do you interpret 'family' differently?
Everything in the constitution is limited either by interpretation through precedent or by laws stemming from it or in the case of family and marriage, dictionary definitions. so therefore everything is limited, not nessecarily by the document itself but by other things referencing it.
See the recent 'de facto family' case from the High Court (under appeal, but still in force) and last(?) year's 'brother's ex' case which in no uncertain terms found marriage to be a civil right.
I dont know the cases you are referencing and google is sending me to the wrong place. would have links?
Can you think of any other valid reason for the Church to challenge partnership in the courts?
well from the churches point of view there can be a number, many of which I don't agree with. But in court, they are going to relay on the constitution and law, not that it "it would interfere with "the free practice of religion"?" cause thats just silly.
Maybe you should try harder. Social change doesn't happen on its own.
Why should I try harder? I am perfectly happy I can walk around Cork holding my boyfriends hand and not get grief so why do I want social change that is already here?
Hi Stephen,
ReplyDeletethese are links which will give you some info on two cases mentioned previously:
Lesbian couple with child 'a de facto family' and Oh brother, it's been a long hard road to our wedding.
Cheers,
Vlad
thanks Vlad!
ReplyDelete