Gay group LGBT Noise says full gay equality would still be discrimination

Joined
Feb 21, 2003
Messages
4,249
Website
www.politics.ie
Twitter
davidcochrane
Yesterday (Sunday) LGBT Noise held a protest in Dublin, and by all accounts it appears to have been a good turnout, between 4,000 and 5,000 people turned up for a march from City Hall to the Department of Justice.

A press release was sent out at 00.45 this morning (long after today's paper's have been finalised I would assume) commenting on the march.

The press release caught my particular attention because of a few things, firstly LGBT Noise makes it appear that the recent Civil Union Partnership Bill was forced upon gay people against their will and that they're (I could say we're there) all angry at the civil unions bill being introduced. Noise seems to think the entire gay community speak as one, and they all are against anything but full gay marriage immediately.

That's rather arrogant and disingenuous at least, and a rather serious fib at worst, the Civil Partnership Bill to many (including me) in the gay "community" is the most progressive piece of social legislation since the decriminalisation of homosexuality. I don't recall anyone being angry or frustrated. There are many who want the law to go further, and it is likely to happen in the future, but Rome wasn't built in a day, and aggressively making it out that it's all or nothing is a rather dangerous position. Were FF to lack the will to bring this legislation in (without a Green backbone perhaps) they could easily have pushed it out to a Referendum, left the crazy god-types with their money to campaign against, and leave a gay lobby with little real financial or political resources to mount a defence. It'd be likely that a referendum would lose, sending the gay movement back *years*.

Secondly (and most surprisingly of all) LGBT Noise says that even if gay people were given full equality, if that equality was accomodated seperately than accomodation given to straight people via traditional marriage, it would still be discrimination.

Nope, you didn't read that wrong, take a look for yourself.

Noise believes that even if partnership offered all the benefits of marriage, it would still be discrimination, as a separate system cannot be called equality.
A seperate system offering equal rights cannot be called equality?

Press release reproduced in full below.

Noise protests that Civil Marriage is the only equality option

Where: City Hall, Dublin to Department of Justice, St Stephen's Green, D2
When: Sunday 22 August 2010
Media Contact: Max Krzyzanowski/ Hazel Cullen


Despite repeated calls for the ban on Civil Marriage to be lifted by
the gay community, the Government has proceeded to sign into law the
Civil Partnership Act on July 19th. Angered and frustrated at this
Government attempt to pacify the gay community, LGBT Noise and up to
4,000 supporters took to the streets again on Sunday 22 August in the
'March for Marriage 2010'.

Speaking to an electric audience consisting of the gay community, plus
friends and family, Noise Organiser Max Krzyzanowski said 'Civil
Partnership excludes LGBT people from a fundamental civil and human
right and makes us second-class citizens. It does not
provide equality for gay people and their families. One of the
most outrageous aspects of the partnership scheme is the complete
lack of any rights for gay parents and their children'.

Colm O'Gorman of Amnesty International was guest speaker on the day.
To those who believe the Civil Partnership will satisfy the gay
community O'Gorman said that this demonstration was a resounding
statement that we will keep protesting until true equality is
achieved. He urged the Government to 'cherish all the children of the
nation equally' by granting us full Civil Marriage rights.
Also in attendance will be members of gay community including
MarriagEquality, the youth group BelongTo, together with the Human
Rights organization Amnesty International.

The 2010 LGBT Noise March for Marriage, afforded everyone an
opportunity to stand up, make our voices heard, and demand full
equality through the granting of Civil Marriage. Noise believes that
even if partnership offered all the benefits of
marriage, it would still be discrimination, as a separate system
cannot be called equality.

Noise calls on the Irish Government to
follow the example of Spain, Sweden, Norway, Canada, Argentina,
Mexico, Iceland and listen to the voices of our community: full Civil
Marriage is the only equality option.


About Noise
Noise is an independent non-party political group which is campaigning
for the provision of civil marriage for all people in Ireland,
irrespective of gender and sexual identity. It is an independent,
non-politically affiliated organisation and seeks to reach out to all
people, gay or straight, who believe in equality and human rights for
all (see lgbtNOISE|Gay Civil Marriage Now! for more).
 


CookieMonster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
33,861
Some people are never happy.

Idiots.
 
M

MrFunkyBoogaloo

Thread title is misleading DC.

What Noise is effectively saying is that even were Civil partnerships to confer the same rights as Marriage on homosexual couples it is still a seperate institution and thus discriminatory. Noise are not the only group to advance this argument btw...

While I welcome the partnership bill I would, and do often, argue for access to Civil Marriage for all.
 

hiding behind a poster

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
48,193
:roll: Rearrange the words "obsessed" and "self", along with a hyphen, into a well-known phrase.
 

lebowskilite

Active member
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
127
Website
elchle.tumblr.com
The message is that even if partnership offered equal rights, the fact that it is still not equated with "marriage" in language (one of the most powerful tools in steering opinion) is a seperation that denotes and encourages a social divide of some kind between married and partnered couples.

That's the argument, that equal rights enshrined with language that highlights a difference do little to promote the idea that families of all "types" are not only equal legally, but also based on the same type of personal connection.

I guess essentially what LGBTN are saying is that legal rights aren't the only factor in promoting in society the idea that same-sex couples are essentially similar to other couples.

I'm finding it hard to describe what I mean though, which is probably the problem Noise had which led to this, seemingly odd, sentence.
 

ne0ica

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
8,140
DC some American gay activists have more or less admitted that the gay marriage is being used as a political tool rather than being an end in itself. I was rather surprised at the reception civil partnership recieved by the gay community in the UK which was overwhelmingly positive compared to Ireland where many gay activists saw it as discrimination.
 

Sean O'Brian

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
900
I wonder will they be upset when, upon the institution of full civil marriage, churches still refuse to marry them...?
 

Sean O'Brian

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
900
Despite repeated calls for the ban on Civil Marriage to be lifted by
the gay community, the Government has proceeded to sign into law the
Civil Partnership Act on July 19th. Angered and frustrated at this
Government attempt to pacify the gay community, LGBT Noise and up to
4,000 supporters took to the streets again on Sunday 22 August in the
'March for Marriage 2010'.
If passing the Civil Partnership Act was an attempt by the government to pacify the homosexual community then it's destined to be about as successful as 'Killing Home Rule with Kindness' was for the Tories.
 

Mouroux

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
96
An important point (and one that I feel is often over-looked by the 'mainstream') here is that many gay folks do not want to lose their own special gay identity and culture. Thus, a separate 'system' (legal or otherwise) can be viewed as a positive insofar as it allows for a separate (thing 'unique') gay identity/culture, complexities and variety of needs, and so on. At the level of rhetoric (noise!) what this boils down to is the huge pressure we all seem to feel to be politically correct, 100% of the time. "Different" = good; "separate = bad".

So pay attention to the wording of the press release: "separate system". We could just as well say "different system".

GLBT Noise my arse!
GLBT rhetoric more like.
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
86,669
The thread title is misleading. It has long been an established principle of civil rights movements that separate but equal systems are not satisfactory in terms of granting equal respect to all citizens. (that's the tricky thing with a concept like 'equality'; it can be measured along various different lines)

There is nothing wrong with discrimination if the discrimination is justified. In this case, however, it is not, and introducing a parallel institution to marriage which granted the various rights and responsibilities associated with marriage, except under a different name sends the message to gay people that their relationships are considered inferior, since they are not considered worthy of being recognised as marriages. I do agree that there is a problem (probably something which is a feature of many minority causes) whereby advocacy groups act under the false assumption that they speak for all gay people, when it is certainly the case that gay people have been and will continue to be divided over these issues. But the point that parallel institutions for gays would still be discriminatory is completely sound.
 
Last edited:

CookieMonster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
33,861
The thread title is misleading. It has long been an established principle of civil rights movements that separate but equal systems are not satisfactory in terms of granting equal respect to all citizens.

There is nothing wrong with discrimination if the discrimination is justified. In this case, however, it is not, and introducing a parallel institution to marriage which granted the various rights and responsibilities associated with marriage, except under a different name sends the message to gay people that their relationships are considered inferior, since they are not considered worthy of being recognised as marriages. I do agree that there is a problem (probably something which is a feature of many minority causes) whereby advocacy groups act under the false assumption that they speak for all gay people, when it is certainly the case that gay people have been and will continue to be divided over these issues. But the point that parallel institutions for gays would still be discriminatory is completely sound.
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885
So more turned up for that march than for the No to NAMA one. Speaks volumes about this country.
 

Bebsaboo

Active member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
145
If there's not much of a difference between calling it civil partnership and civil marriage then why don't we just call it civil marriage for all involved and be done with it?

Was it actually 4000? The Irish Times are saying 2000. Bit of a difference.
 

Bobert

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
1,071
The problem with getting what you want is that you have nothing left to ask for. This release is just blatant show boating on the side of LGBT Noise for fear that they will have nothing left to march about.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top