Sir, – A remarkably universal consensus has emerged on these referendum wordings.
They are very far from ideal.
Some think they do too much; some think they do too little; and many think they do nothing at all but wave a few little virtue flags.
But the choice here is not a binary one – choose them or lose them.
Matt Williams: Take a deep breath and see how Sam Prendergast copes with big Fiji test
New Irish citizens: ‘I hear the racist and xenophobic slurs on the streets. Everything is blamed on immigrants’
Jack Reynor: ‘We were in two minds between eloping or going the whole hog but we got married in Wicklow with about 220 people’
‘I could have gone to California. At this rate, I probably would have raised about half a billion dollars’
We have a noble tradition here of revisiting referendum results. Saying No and No on Friday will give these underwhelming offerings a strong “must do better” message. – Yours, etc,
BRENDAN CONROY,
Windy Arbour,
Dublin 14.
Sir, – I am a disabled woman, a mother and feminist. This is a crucial moment for Ireland. The proposed amendment threatens the independence and autonomy of individuals and families. The Government rejected the citizens’ assembly’s recommendation to protect support, both within and outside the home, replacing it with care within the family, without economic obligations to support.
The referendum could have balanced socioeconomic rights with judicial discretion but instead proposed wording that completely misses the mark. It confines care to the family, ignoring the State’s obligations in providing community care. This oversight isn’t just symbolic; it is insulating the State from its obligations, creating further barriers to independence, autonomy and dignity for many.
We cannot accept a definition of care that fails to recognise all facets of support needed for a fully inclusive society.
This isn’t just about a referendum. It’s about the type of country we want and need. Voting No is not a protest vote; it’s a stand for our rights, autonomy and dignity of every citizen, fully inclusive of people with disabilities as rights-holders with responsibility.
Vote No and demand support in the community as a right and not an afterthought. All women have the right to be respected and supported, including those of us with disabilities. – Yours, etc,
ANN MARIE FLANAGAN,
Ennistymon,
Co Clare.
Sir, – Now that the Government has advised organisations in receipt of public funding to avoid publishing material on the referendums (“Groups getting public funding warned it would be ‘preferable’ to avoid giving referendum information”, News, March 6th), may I suggest you advise Michael McDowell (”Wholly implausible to suggest amendments will have no serious consequence “, Opinion & Analysis, March 6th) to refrain from using his column as a soapbox for the No side?
I buy The Irish Times to be informed, entertained and, primarily these days, for the crossword, but not to be harangued constantly by a columnist who, in his day, also ranted against the Luas, and we all know how that turned out. – Yours, etc,
LIZ McMANUS,
Bray,
Co Wicklow.
Sir, – Please refrain from placing inverted commas around the words “women in the home” when reporting on the referendum (“How ‘women in the home’ provision in the Constitution came about”, News, March 4th). The Constitution does not contain those words in that order.
Even when you write “language around ‘women in the home’”, you create the impression that the Constitution says something it does not. – Yours, etc,
IAN Mac EOCHAGÁIN,
Lohja,
Finland.
Sir, – As a working mother of four children, the irony of hosting the referendum on International Women’s Day is not lost on me.
I wonder how many working mothers are required to take annual leave tomorrow to care for their children whose schools are polling stations?
Probably more than the working fathers anyway. – Yours, etc,
CAROLINE HYNES,
Glenageary,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – Some of the words used by letter writers to describe the thoughts of voters to the forthcoming amendments have included “confused”, “perplexed” and “uncertain”.
Furthermore, your editorial “The Irish Times view on the referendums: legitimate arguments from both sides” (March 5th) claims, in relation to the Oireachtas, “that an opportunity for scrutiny was lost”.
John Thompson (Letters, March 5th) advises, in an analogy, opting for a 10-year-old car rather than hoping for a new one to replace a 30-year-old banger. However, even if my banger was breaking down, I wouldn’t opt for a 10-year-old model without seeing it first and giving the tyres a good kick. – Yours, etc,
KEVIN HOGAN,
Dublin 9.
Sir, – I haven’t decided which way I am voting yet. Every time I think I have made up my mind, I hear a different opinion and I am swayed in the other direction.
My main issue is that clearly something needs to change, but I’m not convinced that the proposed changes are suitable.
It’s a bit like running low on suncream on the last day of your holidays; you can squeeze it out and get the main bits covered, but the bits that are missed will probably get burnt and cause you the most pain. – Yours, etc,
MELANIE HUNTER,
Greystones,
Co Wicklow.
Please note that we will not be publishing any letters regarding the proposed amendments on polling day tomorrow (Friday, March 8th).