• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Bacik's Civil Registration (Marriage Equality) Bill


livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,347
Labour publishes draft law to allow same-sex civil marriage

So we finally have proposed legislation on marriage equality, albeit proposed by a Senator rather than Government, and therefore unlikely to actually become law. Interesting to force the hands of Oireachtas members into a vote though.

It also happens that today is the last day for submissions to the Constitutional Convention on marriage equality, which they will discuss next month. I expect the formal position of many people in response to Bacik's Bill will be to kick the can and say that it's a matter for the Constitutional Convention. But of course that only works if you agree that there's a constitutional prohibition on marriage equality in the first place, which many do not.

Also interesting in the context of the US, where the SC could decide in June that prohibitions on marriage equality breach the US Constitution. If they do, it's difficult to see how long Ireland, or indeed most western countries, would hold out denying marriage equality.

(NB - I know some posters will be delighted with the opportunity for some Bacik bashing, but perhaps we can stick to the actual issue)
 

borntorum

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
12,805
Labour publishes draft law to allow same-sex civil marriage

So we finally have proposed legislation on marriage equality, albeit proposed by a Senator rather than Government, and therefore unlikely to actually become law. Interesting to force the hands of Oireachtas members into a vote though.

It also happens that today is the last day for submissions to the Constitutional Convention on marriage equality, which they will discuss next month. I expect the formal position of many people in response to Bacik's Bill will be to kick the can and say that it's a matter for the Constitutional Convention. But of course that only works if you agree that there's a constitutional prohibition on marriage equality in the first place, which many do not.

Also interesting in the context of the US, where the SC could decide in June that prohibitions on marriage equality breach the US Constitution. If they do, it's difficult to see how long Ireland, or indeed most western countries, would hold out denying marriage equality.

(NB - I know some posters will be delighted with the opportunity for some Bacik bashing, but perhaps we can stick to the actual issue)
What issue? There are numerous gay marriage threads already. Surely the differentiating factor here (if there is one) is that a Labour Senator has published the Bill rather than a Minister. If so, then the politics and personality of that Senator is at least somewhat relevant, no?
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
88,215
I can't see any way to regard this except as a stunt. I don't appreciate issues which affect my dignity and my civil rights being used in this sort of way.
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
88,215
What issue? There are numerous gay marriage threads already. Surely the differentiating factor here (if there is one) is that a Labour Senator has published the Bill rather than a Minister. If so, then the politics and personality of that Senator is at least somewhat relevant, no?
The personality of the politician who publishes a bill is hardly relevant to its contents. There are plenty of gay marriage threads and plenty of Bacik-bashing threads already.
 

corelli

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
4,478
Several issues.

1. All the Irish Case Law would indicate the Bill is unconstitutional as it stands.

2. The Government have no intention of accepting it and will kick the can to the Constitutional Convention, as is proper.

3. It's a stunt and was launched in the Meath constituency, funnily enough.

Can we all go back to sleep now?
 

borntorum

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
12,805
So what's the point of this one then?

(And of course personality is relevant to the politics of the issue, as opposed to the contents of the bill itself)
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
88,215
Several issues.

1. All the Irish Case Law would indicate the Bill is unconstitutional as it stands.

2. The Government have no intention of accepting it and will kick the can to the Constitutional Convention, as is proper.

3. It's a stunt and was launched in the Meath constituency, funnily enough.

Can we all go back to sleep now?
No - Bacik deserves criticism over this. The issue is too important to be used as a political stunt.
 

SilverSpurs

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
5,550
Labour publishes draft law to allow same-sex civil marriage

So we finally have proposed legislation on marriage equality, albeit proposed by a Senator rather than Government, and therefore unlikely to actually become law. Interesting to force the hands of Oireachtas members into a vote though.

It also happens that today is the last day for submissions to the Constitutional Convention on marriage equality, which they will discuss next month. I expect the formal position of many people in response to Bacik's Bill will be to kick the can and say that it's a matter for the Constitutional Convention. But of course that only works if you agree that there's a constitutional prohibition on marriage equality in the first place, which many do not.

Also interesting in the context of the US, where the SC could decide in June that prohibitions on marriage equality breach the US Constitution. If they do, it's difficult to see how long Ireland, or indeed most western countries, would hold out denying marriage equality.

(NB - I know some posters will be delighted with the opportunity for some Bacik bashing, but perhaps we can stick to the actual issue)
Repeat after me:
Social Democrat parties exist to distract the poor with fringe causes to prevent them focussing on the major issues of inequality in education, shambolic public services, long term unemployment etc.
While also acknowledging the terrible treatment of homosexuals for the sole 'crime' of their gender preference.
 

Con Gallagher

Well-known member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
2,413
I can't see any way to regard this except as a stunt. I don't appreciate issues which affect my dignity and my civil rights being used in this sort of way.
Actually its far more important than that. There is a body of opinion that says referendum rather than legislation is necessary.It would be far better if legislation was attempted first and referred to the Supreme Court under Art. 26 with the benefit of the presumption of constitutionality. And only if the Supreme Court says no then go to the majority if they will grant equality.
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
88,215
Actually its far more important than that. There is a body of opinion that says referendum rather than legislation is necessary.It would be far better if legislation was attempted first and referred to the Supreme Court under Art. 26 with the benefit of the presumption of constitutionality. And only if the Supreme Court says no then go to the majority if they will grant equality.
That is the view I hold, but there is nothing in this announcement which says anything one way or the other about the constitutionality of the proposed bill. The status quo among Labour politicians has been to say that a referendum is necessary. If Bacik was serious about this, she would have challenged that opinion.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,622
The personality of the politician who publishes a bill is hardly relevant to its contents. There are plenty of gay marriage threads and plenty of Bacik-bashing threads already.
There's never enough Bacik bashing threads...there should be at least two for every time the good people of various Greater Dublin Area electoral districts have rejected her.
 

JDubliner

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
2,319
Labour publishes draft law to allow same-sex civil marriage

So we finally have proposed legislation on marriage equality, albeit proposed by a Senator rather than Government, and therefore unlikely to actually become law. Interesting to force the hands of Oireachtas members into a vote though.

It also happens that today is the last day for submissions to the Constitutional Convention on marriage equality, which they will discuss next month. I expect the formal position of many people in response to Bacik's Bill will be to kick the can and say that it's a matter for the Constitutional Convention. But of course that only works if you agree that there's a constitutional prohibition on marriage equality in the first place, which many do not.

Also interesting in the context of the US, where the SC could decide in June that prohibitions on marriage equality breach the US Constitution. If they do, it's difficult to see how long Ireland, or indeed most western countries, would hold out denying marriage equality.

(NB - I know some posters will be delighted with the opportunity for some Bacik bashing, but perhaps we can stick to the actual issue)
Delighted.

I am one of the many lawyers who do not consider claims to the effect that there is a constitutional impediment to marriage equality compelling. This legislation deserves widespread political support.
 
Last edited:

artfoley56

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
9,598
I think ill introduce a bill which should do well considering ive been rejected a lot less by the electorate than ms bacik.

Besides, theres infinitely more pressing issues that effect every citizen which are crying out for a bit o legislation but nothing from ivana on those
 

JDubliner

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
2,319
Several issues.

1. All the Irish Case Law would indicate the Bill is unconstitutional as it stands.

2. The Government have no intention of accepting it and will kick the can to the Constitutional Convention, as is proper.

3. It's a stunt and was launched in the Meath constituency, funnily enough.

Can we all go back to sleep now?
A single High Court decision - which incidentally has many ambiguities on that point.

There has been no Supreme Court decision to the effect that it would be unconstitutional.

Do you really think it would the bill be ruled unconstitutional in a Article 26 reference in 2013 or 2014? You really have to be quite obtuse to argue that our Supreme Court would be likely to deem recognition of marriages by same-sex couples unconstitutional today. Times have changed far too much for that.

Here are the numbers:

Over 437 million people on four continents live in jurisdictions where same sex marriages are recognized or performed.

That's right - basically every western democracy either recognises marriage or registered partnerships (and the latter are increasingly moving towards granting full legal equality to gay and lesbian people.
 

tigerben

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
4,621
Has Bacik ever been elected by the people!? Sooner rather than later the senate should be got rid off. Let's vote on that first!
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
88,215
Besides, theres infinitely more pressing issues that effect every citizen which are crying out for a bit o legislation but nothing from ivana on those
If you were prevented by law from marrying your partner, you might think that this is a pressing issue.
 

artfoley56

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
9,598
If you were prevented by law from marrying your partner, you might think that this is a pressing issue.
I didnt say it wasnt a pressing issue. I said there were issues that are more pressing and that affect more people. Are you denying that?
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
88,215
I didnt say it wasnt a pressing issue. I said there were issues that are more pressing and that affect more people. Are you denying that?
I don't understand the point of making the claim. If our politicians cannot deal with more than one issue at a time, they are not likely to be able to solve any of our problems, let alone the most important ones.

It's not as though this issue is an especially tricky one to deal with either - pass some legislation, test it in the SC, then if it fails, schedule a referendum. That's much more straightforward than fixing the economy, creating jobs, etc.
 
Top