LGBT Noise – A Change of Message?

From Suzy’s Blog:

Next week sees another protest from LGBT Noise giving the Government the red card and calling for Civil Marriage. The turn out at the last rally was dissappointing and I’ve noticed a slight shift in the plugs to get those who don’t want to marry themselves to support the cause. Wonder would it ever work the other way?

Now last Wednesday I met one of the LGBT Noise activists in a pub, and when I mentioned my opposition to the whole gay marriage thing there nearly was an argument (we decided not too as it was a pub). But again, people seam to react to my opposition gat marriage rasies heckles and for some reason people can’t seem to respect my views on it.

They keep going on about rights and things like that and I point out that the state choses to recognise some relationships, but they dont have to call marriage. I am perfectly happy with Civil Unions/Civil Partnerships/Blueberrysherbets/What ever you want to call them.

While reading the comments on Suzy post I found myself agreeing with someone I normally dont, and that was Ian McGahon, in his comment he said

1; The political will to bring in marriage for gay and lesbian couples is not there in Ireland – out of 166 TDs I would guess that 50 would support it (total guess – no basis for guess)

2; I feel that there are couples who need rights – economic, social, political and these rights could be legislated for tomorrow but we don’t seem to consider these people – groups like LGBT Noise disregard many people; those who do not want to marry, those who badly need any form of legal recognition tomorrow

I fully agree with these points. Its not going to happen anytime soon and while we keep blathering on about Gay Civil Marriage these people are losing out.

We need Civil Unions now, not Gay Marriage next year.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Author: Stephen

Cork born and bred, proud European and Irishman. Involved in many organisations and politics. Also writes for and UCC Express.

13 thoughts on “LGBT Noise – A Change of Message?”

  1. why do you keep saying that you *oppose* civil marriage for same-sex couples? I searched the blog and found that you favour the more pragmatic “Micheal Collins approach” which is for more rights now. You may oppose the tactics but do you really oppose the ultimate goal?

    1. I used to favour Micheal Collins approach but lately I have begun questioning the ultimate goal. I have said in a number of paces on the blog that I oppose civil marriage, especially in the newer posts on the subject. I have become jaded with the demand for Gay Marriage and at this point don’t see the point in it.

  2. Pingback: Anonymous
  3. The point is that civil marriage is an important legal contract between two people and it establishes an important relationship between the two people in the eyes of the law (imho). Just looking at the civil partnership bill illustrates how many areas it affects materially and while it may not be important to you right now, it is likely to be important for you in the future and it’s very important to thousands of people right now – parents, partners, children and families

    1. Joe, could the Civil Partnership be that important legal document? In fact as it is proposed here (if it ever gets to the Oireachtas) it will will be an important legal document between two people that covers the rights and entitlements needed. (Albeit except adoption rights, but thats a different fight). To me marriage seems to be held as big ending, the be all and end all when its not for everyone,

  4. I’m shocked that I agree with you on something too!

    However my personal position is that I do support the ultimate goal but we should not be sacrificing people who need rights now

  5. yes, marriage is not for everyone, but is it not right for civil marriage to be made available to those that want it? Why should people be denied that opportunity?

    1. Just because you want something, does not mean you are entitled to it. A lot of the time to me the campiagn for Gay Marriage has been an “its not fair” argument. That in itself is not an arguement. You need to explain why it is not fair.

      In respect of civil marriage, the state choses which types of relationships to recognise. This is not a right. The state by recognising a relationship bestows certain rights and duties upon the relationship. The same is true of Civil Partnership, its a just a different sort of recognition

  6. Firstly Stephen

    I don’t agree that adoption is a different fight – to me it is the same fight as this is about recognition of families

    An argument that LGBT Noise and MarriagEquality is that extra constitutional protections would be offered to married couples – I’d actually like to know more about what these protections would be – anyone?

    To Joe – I would like to invert your questions slightly “marriage is not for everyone, but is it not right for civil marriage to be made available to those that want it? Why should people be denied that opportunity?” – why then should people who do not want to marry but want a civil partnership be denied that opportunity

    By the way if anyone is interested heres the most recent Labour Conference motion

  7. @Ian civil marriage is available to those that want it. Actually, religions simply witness and bless the marriage that takes place when couples sign the register. Secondly, while civil partnership bill allows for partnerships for same-sex couples only, it does introduce domestic partnerships for all couples.

    @Stephen there are two rights at stake here. The right to marry is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the ECHR to which we are legally bound.

    The Irish constitution promises me the right to be treated equally to my fellow citizens before the law. Civil Partnerships are not equal to civil marriage and the state is restricting the former to same-sex couples and the latter to opposite-sex couples (mutually-exclusive). This creates a clear two-tier system of recognition for the same thing. Can/should same-sex couples to be considered inferior before the law?

    Beyond the legal soundness of the current situation, can you honestly say that you think is is okay for states to only allow marriage based on whatever grounds they choose? Do you approve of banning interracial marriage? Do you approve of the Penal Law that banned intermarriage of Protestants and Catholics? Would you approve of a ban on marriage based on nationality or disability?

  8. As a complete aside I have very little faith in many in FG (and FF) on this issue – The likes of Lucinda Creighton going off bleating to the Irish Catholic is as bad as Senator Jim Walsh but not quite as bad as Dermot Ahern and of course the former FG TD for Louth

  9. I am among those who would not like to get married but would support gay marraige. What motivates me is simple inequality- If I was told that I was not allowed in a particular building because of my race, gender, sexuality or eye colour I’d be a bit bitter about it. If everyone who went into the building got money and tax breaks I’d get active about it.

    Additionally the symbolism of gay people being treated equally to straight people would help combat cultural homophobia. As it is, people with homophobic attitudes find themselves backed up by legislation.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.