Dáil debates

Wednesday, 11 March 2015

An Bille um an gCeathrú Leasú is Tríocha ar an mBunreacht (Comhionannas Pósta) 2015: An Dara Céim (Atógáil) - Thirty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution (Marriage Equality) Bill 2015: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

10:40 am

Photo of Clare DalyClare Daly (Dublin North, United Left) | Oireachtas source

There you are now, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

You should not tempt us because we could start talking about anything.

This legislation is such a no-brainer that it is almost peculiar that the House is spending time discussing it. I am not surprised the debate is proceeding more speedily than anticipated when it was scheduled. How could anyone oppose such a rational proposition? It is almost embarrassing that the House is discussing an issue related to a personal commitment between two people. That such a commitment could be prohibited in modern Ireland on sexual orientation grounds or for any other reason is a ludicrous idea. This view is shared by the vast majority of citizens, as I hope will become clear on 22 May.

I believe the groups opposed to the legislation represent a small but loud minority. They argue that no other country provides for same-sex marriage in its constitution. However, no other country imposes the same restrictions on citizens' personal lives as our Constitution does. The idea that the State would restrict the personal behaviour of citizens is abhorrent. I am glad, therefore, that all political parties and groups in the House support the legislation as it shows that there is not much to discuss.

The issue of equality lies at the heart of this debate. How could anyone favour inequality? If people do not want to enter into a same-sex marriage, no one is forcing them to do so. How can people have the brass neck to argue they have a right to impose a restriction on marriage or deny an opportunity to somebody else? That is a reprehensible idea.

The institution of marriage has changed utterly. Historically, it was linked to the transfer of property rights, with women and children deemed to be the property of the male in the marriage, which was always heterosexual. The purpose of marriage was to protect property through the use of dowries and so forth. It also had a strong basis in religion, with Catholics and Protestants prohibited from marrying and so forth. While a modern marriage may be solemnised in a religious service, nowadays it is generally a civil arrangement between two adults who wish to make a public declaration of their commitment to each other. No one else is affected. There is a strong belief that the State has failed to keep pace with the major changes that have occurred in society in recent years. The forthcoming referendum presents a positive opportunity to do something about this failure.

Research suggests that the only way the referendum could be lost is if people do not turn out to vote. I would like to use whatever influence I have to appeal to anyone who cares about my opinion to please come out and vote to take this step. People have traditionally used referendums to vote against the Government because they are not happy with its work in other areas. While it is understandable that people adopt this approach, they should not do so on this issue. The referendum should send out a positive signal to the world and minority groups living here that Ireland is a society of equals. It is rare for citizens to be given an opportunity to vote for something that is good and positive and will make a difference. This is one such opportunity.

As Deputies are well aware, the well-being of children has nothing to do with the legislation. Nevertheless, the issue has been manipulated and introduced to the debate. Marriage has nothing to do with children per seand it is an insult to suggest that children would be worse off if they were raised in a relationship that is not heterosexual. That view also belies the research that has been done in this area. Large numbers of people are raised in different modern family arrangements, for example, many children are raised by grandparents, a mother or father living alone, a father and-or mother with a stepfather and-or stepmother or two fathers and two mothers. Who cares? If people love their children and look after them, that is all that counts. It is laughable to suggest that people should be prevented from making a commitment to each other on the basis of their sexual orientation.

This is the first time I have been able to welcome wholeheartedly a proposal put forward by the Government. That alone is special and I appeal to people to come out on 22 May and deliver a resounding "Yes" vote.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.