LGBT Noise Protest - Register Your Protest

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.

Me and Gay Marriage (Again)

So the Gay Marriage debate continues apace heightened since all the happenings since the passing of Prop 8 in California.

Maman Poulet has two excellent posts on some mistakes been made by groups here in Ireland looking for gay marriage and I have to agree whole heatedly with her. She gives some advice and this should be required reading for LGBT Noise and Marriage Equality activists. On one point that I must stress is that where Maman stresses

Don’t talk about segregation and apartheid - see here. Find your/our own language to use in this situation and stop using the very different experiences of others.

She is correct. A phrase that is far more useful us "Second Class Citizens" and is something that resonates more with people. Its something that people understand more in the context of gay rights.

GayPatriot.net got me thinking of the political make-up of those campaigning for gay marriage, but the one thing they continually over look is a question that is posed over on Gaypatriot.net

With a leadership which well represents its left-wing donor base, how do gay groups reach out to social moderates and conservatives whom we most need to move?

In short, the gay groups need to reach out to people who are least like themselves. They need to communicate with people who speak a different (cultural) language than they do.

That is something LGBT Noise, Marriage Equality and others need to sit down and try to answer. Slogans will get you so far but you need persuasive arguements.

In relation to my view on gay marriage, I find myself in complete agreement with a number of people. Firstly I agree with Queer Conservative when he states

Personally I think the whole argument boils down to semantics, i.e. the word "marriage." Well fine, don't call it marriage. Exempt religious institutions from having to recognize it. As long as the rights, privileges, and duties are the same I don't care if we call it Blueberry Sherbet.

This has been an arguement of mine for awhile. I don't like the word marriage and I am perfectlly happy with Civil Unions/Civil Partnerships. I mightened be so happy with Blueberry Sherbet

Secondly I also find myself in agreement with GayPatriotWest when he states:

They trying to change the type of relationships states privilege by calling them marriages.

Note the verb I use in that last sentence, “privilege” because that’s what states do when they call a particular kind of union, “marriage,” they privilege it. I’ve been saying that for years.

Again this is something I have stated before to friends. An article byThomas Sowell backs up that arguement.

The politically clever way to get special privileges is to call them "rights"-- especially "equal rights."

Thirdly I find myself completely agreeing with Sowell when he states:

Marriage is not a right but a set of legal obligations imposed because the government has a vested interest in unions that, among other things, have the potential to produce children, which is to say, the future population of the nation.

Gays were on their strongest ground when they said that what they did was nobody else's business. Now they are asserting a right to other people's approval, which is wholly different.

None of us has a right to other people's approval.

(I do recommending reading his full column as like Maman Poulet he points out the problems with using segregation in relation to the campaign for gay marriage)

Strong stuff but wholly accurate.

The campaigns, not just in California and Ireland, but around the globe for Gay Marriage need to look closely at what they are agruing for and try and phrase it so that they get the maximum support. Until they can do this they are not likely to get mine or many other conservatives support for gay marriage.

UCC LGBT's Civil Partnership Debate

UCC LGBT this Wednesday will be hosting a Debate on the Government's proposed Civil Partnership Bill. It's on at 8:00pm in Boole 1 on Thursday if anyone is interested in heading along. (Facebook Event) The motion that will be debated will be "This House believes that Civil Partnership will create a 'marriage apartheid' in Ireland". An interesting subject. Senator Dan Boyle will be speaking against the motion and speaker from the MarriagEquality campaign group will be there to speak for it.

While I'm all for debates I'm not sure if it's worth my while going considering the room will be fairly biased for the motion, but I am tempted to go along and speak against the motion. But I'll see how I am after work on Thursday. If I do go I will be twitting the meeting!

More UCCLGBT Blog

Equality California considers Prop 8 Passage a "Mob Vote"

In a letter that is posted on the Gay News Blog, Geoff Kors, Executive Director of Equality California says the result should be thrown out due to the "outrageous lies and questionable tactics by the other side, be thrown out. We know our rights cannot be taken away by a mob vote."

I am amazed he calls it a mob vote? Is not California a democracy? Is it not the job of Equality California and others against Prop 8 to highlight the lies and the tactics used by its proponents. If it passed because of lies and tactics then it shows the incompetence of the "No on 8" Campaign. The route they are taking now, more legal action asking that the results of a legal democratic election "be thrown out" is outrageous!

I am also very questioning of the protests against the Mormon Church. So what if they supported Prop 8? Aren't they allowed as a interest group to participate in politics? Parading signs like "Vile Mormons" is not going to get you any more supporters!

If those that were deicted to the cause actually stopped doing and started thinking they would do what is suggested over on GayPatriot and see where they went wrong. One of the writers there has also written an excellent piece on Pajamas Media on Making the Case for Gay Marriage. There is no point in blaming others when you failed as you must take some of the blame yourself.

I hope the California Courts have learned that they cannot go against the wishes of the MAJORITY of the people and through the results out.

Prop 8

I stayed largely away from the Debate on Prop 8 going on in blogosphere apart from one post about Google supporting it (which I regret btw), but the actions of people since the passing of the proposition makes me wonder if I would have voted no considering my position gay marriage. I kind of have to agree with gaypatriot.net in calling them sore losers. The people of California have voted 52.5% to 47.5% (results from Ballotpedia)

Now I am all in favour of democracy and think the fact that the PEOPLE overturned the decision of the Court to be a good thing. BUT what about all the same-sex couples who did get married, what happens to them? They are in a legal limbo. It is these people I feel sorry for.

The actions of the sore losers is what will not gain gay marriage any more supporters in fact it will harden the stance of those against it. The idea of bringing yet another court case will also harden the stance of the opponents as you are ignoring the will of the PEOPLE.

I think they should wait another four years as they can but another amendment forward. Why four years? Exit pools showed that young people supported the measure by a large majority so maybe that is the tactic they should be thinking of.

Google 'hope that California voters will vote no on Proposition 8'

Yes, that's right, that evil company Google are taking a stance on Proposition 8 in California. For those of you who don't know Proposition 8 is the following: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California". Basically the proposition is to make In re Marriage Cases (2008) [76 Cal.Rptr.3d 683, 183 P.3d 384] (PDF), which made Gay Marriages legal in California, illegal again. Obviously if I had a vote in California I would be voting no, but as I live in Ireland I don't. It is heartening though to see a big corporation, like Google, taking a stance on it.

What I wonder is will this backlash on Google or will it further cement their position? Only time will tell.


Official Google Blog - Our position on California's No on 8 campaign

Me and Gay Marriage

Okay, so I get in a lot of trouble in gay circles and lefty equality circles (you know who you are Len) about my opposition or really lack of support for gay marriage.

I recently posted over on The Political Gay about my thoughts on the Heads of the Civil Partnership Bill 2008 (available here (PDF)).

Though I did take part in the LGBT Noise protest in Cork about the bill (Gaycork.com thread) I am not that fussed. I am broadly supportive of the bill and will be hoping it is passed more or less in its current state.

The one thing that made me turn up last week was the issue of adoption and children in general. It is completely ignored by the bill and I am not a happy bunny because of it. Of course, this might change in the future and maybe a second bill will allow gay adoption like what has happened in the UK. So I am adopting the Micheal Collins approach to this bill. For those of you unsure of that, I mean along the lines of what Collins said about the Anglo-Irish Treaty. It‘gives us the freedom, not the ultimate freedom that all nations desire and develop to, but the freedom to achieve it.’ I believe something similar about this bill, it will be a gradual thing, and as time goes by we will gain more rights and entitlements.

Now as for Marriage, I ain't a fan of it. Thats just who I am, to me its too religious and can never se myself have a Gay Civil Marriage. While Civil Partnership's I do support full heartedly and will be lobbying my Local TD's to support it with the minimum of amendments.

A Churches Pragmatic Approach

Though I am not a chritian (still not sure what I am) I am always heartened of reports in the press of Churches that a Pro-LGBT. One of those churches is the Episcopal Church in the United States. Two Bishops in California have released guidelines for clergy to allow gay marriages to take place in their church. The marriage itself will not be carried out by a clergy member but by the civil registrar.

The two Bishops, Marc Andrus, Bishop of California, and Mary Gray-Reeves, Bishop of El Camino Real, deserve great applause and appreciation. This comes about due to the May 15th Supremem Court ruling in California. Also there will be a amendment in the fall elections to try and change the constitution to ban gay marriage. Could be an interesting election, its one I will be watching more then the Presidentials, well nearly!

Of course this serves to highlight the growing split in the Anglican Communion in which the Episcopal Church is a member. The Lambeth Conference, which takes place next month could either split the church or heal it. Though gay issues are not on the agenda, the Nigerian Church is not very pleased with the goings on in the US. Expect it to feature a lot, if they get their way!

----
Full Story:
US Bishops issue guidelines for gay marriages - Religious Intelligence
Links of interest:
Evangelicals Concerned
Lambeth Conference

Why we won't see Gay Partnerships under the Cowen Adminsitration

I have read two blog posts recently that will send chills down the spine of everyperson in Ireland who has campiagned for Gay Partnerships (Unions, Marriages, Whaterver you want to call em!). Two high profile figures in Biffo's cabinet are not fans of the Gays.

One is Tánasite and Minister for Trade, Enterprise and Employment and the other is Minsiter for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

It was David Garrahy's blog that alerted me to Mary Coughlan's attitude and Maman Poulet who alerted me to Dermot Ahern.

This is quite worrying, Dermot Ahern's Derpartment is the one that will be responsible for drafting the legislation and Mary Coughlan will have a lot of sway in Cabinet as Tánaiste.

I must say I am disapointed that in Ireland two high profile ministers can be against same-sex unions and hold up things dispite the fact that most people in Ireland would support some form of recognition.

UPDATE: I've expanded on this over on The Political Gay

Labour ro prioritise Civil Unions in 2007

From the Labour Press Office

Recognition of same sex unions must be priority for 2007

The Leader of the Labour Party, Pat Rabbitte TD, has said that the issue of legal recognition of and proper protection for couples in same sex relationships must be a priority for the Oireachtas in 2007.

"I am confident that the our society has matured and attitudes changed sufficiently to the point where the majority of our people would have no problem with legislation that would provide same-sex couples with the same basic rights and duties that are available to married couples.

"Shortly before Christmas, my colleague Brendan Howlin TD, published, on behalf of the Labour Party, a private members bill that would create a status relationship equivalent to marriage for the benefit of people who are of the same sex and who, under the current constitutional understanding of marriage, cannot marry each other. The Bill provides that, in most respects, the rules of law applying to marriage would also apply to civil unions.

"If passed, this Bill would have an immediate, significant and practical impact on the everyday lives of gay and lesbian couples. Those who choose to enter into a civil union would enjoy vital legal rights which married couples take for granted, in areas such as inheritance and taxation. The Bill would bring to end many of the routine forms of institutionalised discrimination that exist in our society and which impinge on in a very real way on people's lives.

"The Bill will be brought on to the floor of the Dail early in the new year, a step that will mark a watershed in our social and legislative history. This will be the first time that the Dail will have been given an opportunity to debate legislation providing for the legal registration and recognition of civil unions between persons of the same sex.

"The Labour Party has a long and proud record of driving the equality agenda in this country. The constitutional amendment providing for divorce and the legislation reforming the availability of contraception are legacies of Labour Party Ministers, while Labour also provided the political impetus that led to the decriminalisation of homosexual activities between consenting adults. Our Civil Unions Bill is entirely consistent with that tradition.

"We have produced this Bill because we are committed to the principle of full equality for gay and lesbian citizens and particularly for those in same sex unions. While both the Taoiseach and the Tanaiste have both made sympathetic noises, I do not see any willingness on the part of this government to tackle the issue. Indeed despite the publication in November of the Report of the Working Group on Domestic Relationships, chaired by Anne Colley, the government has not given any commitment on the introduction of legislations to provide for civil unions and appears determined to kick the issue into touch until after the general election.

"This must not be allowed to happen. Great distress was caused to many of our citizens in the past by long delays in the introduction of social reforms that have now become accepted as the norm. This must not be allowed to happen in regard to gay and lesbian citizens. The Oireachtas must rise to the challenge by enacting this legislation.

Well done to the Labour party! I shall be watching the progress of this bill with interest!

Irish support for EU membership, still the highest.

According to a new Euro-barometer survey which was released today Ireland still tops the table for support for continued membership of the EU. Ireland is at 78% closely followed by Luxembourg (74%). The UK is at the bottom of the current member states at 34% with only Croatia below it at 32%.

Also 87% of people in Ireland believe we have benefited from membership of the EU. Ireland also tops the poll on the positive image of the EU (73%).

On trust in EU institutions 60% of those questioned trusted the European Commission and 66% trusted the European Parliament which came out as being the most trusted institution in the EU.

On EU policies, for the Common Foreign and Security Policy Ireland is languishing near the end of the table 59% support and is right at the bottom of the table for support for a Common Defence and Security Policy with 52%

Less then half of those interviewed were in favour of further enlargement on the Union, with 48% in favour of expansion.

On the EU Constitution, 56% were in favour but this could easily be changed as 35% of respondents were "unable to express an opinion" (Euro-Barometer 66, December 2006, p33)

On the issue of same-sex marriage support is split across Europe 49% disagreeing and 44% in favour of it. In Ireland 41% agreed to this.

On the issue of Gay Adoption, 68% of respondents were against it with only 26% in favour. In Ireland support was slightly higher at 30%

For the full report click here

USI "DISAPPOINTED" OVER COURT'S REFUSAL TO UPHOLD EQUAL MARRIAGE RIGHTS

The Union of Students in Ireland (USI) has expressed deep disappointment at the High Court's rejection of a bid by two women to have their marriage in Canada upheld under Irish law.

Calling the legal judgement "questionable", USI's Steve Conlon said:
"it is clearly untenable to interpret the 1937 Constitution in a way that fails to read into its provisions a safeguarding of fundamental human rights".

USI said the High Court ruling would only serve to intensify pressure on the Government to entrench the right of gay and lesbian people to enter into civil marriage on nondiscriminatory terms – if necessary by passing new legislation.

USI gay and lesbian spokesperson Steve Conlon said: "USI is deeply disappointed that the 1937 Constitution has been interpreted as a reason for refusing to acknowledge the right of gay and lesbian people to be treated as equal citizens under Irish law.

"The 1937 Constitution was meant, and is still meant, to entrench and advance the rights of all Irish people without exception. The Constitution was never meant to restrict or reduce our rights. Surprisingly, that appears to have been the verdict of the High Court today."

USI President Colm Hamrogue said: "The 1937 Constitution is a living document, in the sense that it should be interpreted in line with the evolving standards and expectations of a civilised society. The Constitution should buttress, not undermine, civil equality.

"USI will continue to support efforts by Drs Zappone and Gilligan – and thousands of other citizens – to win acknowledgement in Ireland of their human rights to enter into civil marriage on an equal footing."

Bush Confused?

So we all know George W (dubya) Bush is anti-Gay Marriage and has said in the past that children should ideall raised by a mother and father. Then he goes and confuses us all.

When talking recently to a magazine he was commenting on the fact that Dick Cheney's Lesbian Daughter is pregnant.

"I think Mary is going to be a loving soul to her child. And I'm happy for her," Bush said in an interview with People magazine

"Mary Cheney is going to make a fine mom, and she's going to love this child a lot," he said, according to an excerpt from the interview

Bush has tried to get a Constitutional Ban on gay marriage into the US constitution but congress is refusing to pass it.

The Group Focus on the Family have said the following

"We should not enter into yet another untested and far-reaching social experiment, this one driven by the desires of same-sex couples to bear and raise children," Dobson said in a recent commentary published on the organization's Web site.

Dobson is chair of the group.

Will this split the conservatives in the US

Law Reform Commission: Report on Rights and Duties of Cohabit

http://www.lawreform.ie/#Third%20Annual%20Conference%202006%20Cohabitation:%20Models%20for%20Legal%20Reform

At the above link the Law Reforms Commission's Report on Rights and Duties of Cohabitants which was published yesterday.

Also availible at the above link is the Draft Cohabitants Bill 2006.

Ruling on lesbian action next month

The High Court will give judgment next month on a landmark action by a
lesbian couple aimed at having their marriage in Canada recognised as valid
here or, alternatively, securing the right to marry here.

The action was brought by Katherine Zappone, a public policy consultant, and
Ann Louise Gilligan, an academic, against the Revenue Commissioners and the
State.

Keep your eyes open for events to coincide with this

Same Sex Relationships

GLEN welcomes reports that the cabinet has discussed options for legal recognition of same sex relationships and urges that the report of the Working Group on Domestic Partnership is carefully considered; "This report provides a very important analysis of options open to Ireland and it needs to be carefully considered and widely discussed" says Keith O'Malley, Chief Executive of GLEN.



GLEN Chairperson Kieran Rose adds, "The publication of this report comes hot on the heels of a survey which reveals that a huge majority, 84% of the population support equality for the relationships of same-sex couples.



"Marriage remains the full equality option and the option we would like to see adopted" says Keith O'Malley, "as well as being the fairest, most equitable way forward, it is also the easiest and fastest to enact - and the most effective".



"The choice facing the government now is about what kind of society we want Ireland to be", says Keith O'Malley, "we here in GLEN are working towards a situation when being lesbian or gay is unremarkable and when same sex relationships are acknowledged as fully legitimate".



The Taoiseach expressed this same sentiment when, earlier this year, he said "Our sexual orientation is not an incidental attribute. It is an essential part of who we are. All citizens, regardless of sexual orientation, stand equal in the eyes of our laws. Sexual orientation cannot, and must not, be the basis of a second-class citizenship. Our laws have changed, and will continue to change, to reflect this principle".

The Options paper is availible at the link below

Can I Marry Hugh?

Excellent flyer done by Steven Conlon the Union of Students in Ireland LGBT Rights officer!

KAL Rally

This took place on tuesday outside Leinster house. I was in attendance on behalf of USI LGBT WG. I can be seen holding ICTU Youth's Banner!!

Gay couple wed in Nepal

Cheered by scores of wedding guests, two gay men exchanged garlands of marigolds on Saturday in the first public same-sex marriage ceremony in tradition-bound Nepali society.

The guests, mostly activists from gay and lesbian rights groups and a few relatives, applauded as Anil Mahaju, 25, and Diya Kashyap, 21, exchanged vows in Katmandu, Nepal's capital.

The marriage will not receive official approval, as Nepalese laws do not recognise same-sex unions, said Suni Pant, who heads the nonprofit Blue Diamond Society. There was no Hindu priest present to conduct the wedding.

"They have decided to get the marriage registered, but I think they will have to wait for a new constitution that would legitimise same-sex marriages," Pant said.

Rights groups are hoping a new constitution, now being prepared by experts, will provide Nepal's gay men and lesbians with civic rights.

Although there are no official figures, Pant said there are around 20,000 gay men and 1,000 lesbians in Nepal, a country with a population of around 25 million where gay sex is a crime punishable by up to two years in prison under public offense laws.

USI URGES MINISTERS NOT TO PREEMPT DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP FINDINGS

23 August 2006



The Union of Students in Ireland (USI) has urged the Justice Department to stop putting pressure on the group set up to examine the issue of granting tax, pension and other rights to gay couples.



The Justice Department revealed that “most” submissions to the Working Group on Domestic Partnerships oppose changes to the law that would increase the entitlements of cohabitants, including gays and lesbians.



But USI branded the Justice Department’s decision to intervene with slanted details “deeply irresponsible”.



USI cited a high level of support for ending statutory discrimination against gays. It said the Justice Department must now let the working group continue its work without further interference.



USI President Colm Hamrogue said: “The working group on civil partnerships is coming under pressure to recommend unduly phlegmatic reforms to the law, which would not extend full legal protections to gays and lesbians in committed relationships.



“The working group must be allowed to make the necessary proposals for recognising the equal rights of all people who wish to formalise their relationships.”



USI lesbian, gay and bisexual spokesperson Steve Conlon said: “As well as recommending legal changes that would protect the rights of gays and lesbians in committed relationships, USI also expects the working group to inform the Justice Minister that denying the right of gays and lesbians to marry is fundamentally incompatible with his responsibility to uphold the European Convention on Human Rights.”