Sharon Keogan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

They are relevant to my two amendments. The first letter is from Catherine Monaghan from Ashford, County Wicklow who states:

Sir, – I will be voting No in the upcoming referendum.

I do not want the very small acknowledgement of my role and my work in the home to be removed from our Constitution.

The article in question is symbolic, a token, at best; we all know that the State does not actually do much to enable women who would like to give up work outside the home in order to raise their children. In the current economic climate, most parents cannot afford to sacrifice an income if they want to own, or even rent, a house.

Neither do I want the article to be replaced with gender-neutral waffle so that we can all pretend to be living in a perfect world where domestic work, the bearing, feeding and care of children, and the care when it’s needed of family elders and other dependents is shared equally between men and women. It isn’t! We all know it isn’t; the 2022 census showed that 90 per cent of people filling this role were women.

Let’s be open and honest about the differences between the sexes. Men are not women. Fathers are not mothers (ask the vast majority of parents who their child wants when they are feeling sick? Mum, of course!).

Women are in no way constrained by our Constitution (I was raised by a mother who worked full time in a fulfilling career). It simply states that we have a right, not an obligation, to stay home with our children if we wish.

Instead of abolishing or amending this article, why don’t we hold the State to it?

Think of the benefit to the children of Ireland, and thus to Ireland itself, if family and home were prioritised. A stable foundation at home leads to happy, healthy, and well-adjusted adults.

The next letter from Anne Harbison, Aughrim, County Wicklow states:

Sir, – Justine McCarthy needs to get out more (“Vote Yes to lose the patronising pat on the head to women”, Opinion & Analysis, January 19th). Contrary to her assertions, it is not “mansplainers” who are leading the charge for a No vote in the upcoming referendum on amending Article 41.2 of the Constitution. Leaving aside the opinions of representatives of NGO groups, whose impartiality cannot be depended upon as they are the recipients of Government funding, several prominent women have spoken up against the proposed amendment, including the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, Catherine Connolly TD.

Last year, the Government set up a scheme – the “Basic Income for the Arts” scheme – whereby workers in that sector receive a basic income paid from the public purse. Micheál Martin said at its launch that “We need to invest in that which sustains us”. I am baffled as to why women’s groups – and women journalists – are not calling on the Government to make good the Constitution’s declaration that women who choose to work in the home give to the State “a support without which the common good cannot be achieved” and demand that the Government pay women in the home a similar basic income.

I could read out more. I have loads of them here but I will move on to my amendment.

My amendment is a simple one. It addresses the two main flaws in the Government's proposed wording in Article 42B. First, it rectifies the removal of the word "woman" from the article and, second, it strengthens the onus on the State to support home care. While I often criticise the Government, I must congratulate it on its unparalleled ability to engage in that most essential act of modern politics - the spinning of a narrative. That it has apparently managed to convince women up and down the country that erasing them from the Constitution is a win for women's rights is an act of propaganda that would make even the most scheming dictator blush. The State-sponsored gaslighting of the women of Ireland has told the usual worn-thin tale of escaping from the sceptre of the Catholic Church and moving on from the dark ages, labelling Article 41.2 backward and archaic and painting the Government of the day as warriors of social justice marching ever onwards to a brave new world. Yesterday's debate saw many Members doing their best impression of a calendar, loudly reminding us that it is 2024, as if it being the current year lent weight to their arguments and perversely weakened those of the Opposition.

Women who chose to work in their own homes, raising their children and looking after their families were worthy and deserving of protection in 1937, and they are worthy and deserving of protection and mention in 2024. The notion that the merit of an idea can be wholly eroded merely by the passage of time is so absurd that only a politician could espouse it. Yes, it may be the case that the Catholic Church no longer holds the sway over the social and political realms it once did. However, its receding has merely made way for a new church - that of progressivism, which has it own dogma, creed and sins. Chief among them is recognising the innate differences between men and women. The church of progressivism teaches it is not enough to simply value and treat men and women equally. Their equality must be universal and absolute, such that there are no differences between them. To this end, differences must be eliminated, where possible, and, where impossible, they must be dogmatically ignored. To recognise them is to sin and to speak about them is to risk excommunication, being cancelled, and being labelled a heretic and far-right. The fact that women voluntarily take on more care roles as mothers or otherwise becomes a problem to solve, rather than a reality to accept. Rather than being celebrated and praised, their kind, compassionate, nurturing and caring natures become unmentionable aspects of their characters. After all, women are just like men. All language must be gender neutral for fear of giving offence to any hypothetical third party. The recognition of any one is taken away to be the exclusion of every other. This is what has led us here where the recognition of the uniqueness of motherhood is deemed politically inconvenient. The word "woman" must be struck out from the Constitution by the people who cannot even define what a woman is. It is a perfect encapsulation of the absurdity of this Government. I hope the people of Ireland see it for what it is.

Of course, this amendment will not be accepted. No amendment will be. As we have been told, this is because the Government wanted to play political astrology and put the referendums on a special date and because the separation of powers is dead and gone in Ireland, given the Executive absolute control of the Legislature. I commend my amendment to the House and I recommend the public gets out and votes on 8 March against both these amendments. Vote "No" and "No".