Sir, – The Referendum Commission in its first statement on the matter has confirmed beyond doubt that this referendum is not necessary in order to bring about same-sex marriage. The commission says: “The Constitution does not define marriage and it does not set out who is entitled to marry or who is not entitled to marry. The rules about who is entitled to marry are set out in legislation.”
Under our Constitution, it is the Oireachtas that changes or enacts legislation, not the people by referendum.
In a State where the Government says we have no money for so many really necessary and urgent things, the same Government is about to spend at least €20 million on an unnecessary referendum to do something that is the job of the Oireachtas. It is not as if the Oireachtas is exactly bogged down with existing work. How many times since the 2011 election has one or other House of our Oireachtas adjourned because it had no business to transact? This referendum is a joke; an expensive and divisive instrument to give our parliament rights it already has. It should use those rights without delay to enact marriage equality. – Yours, etc,
BRIAN LACEY,
Dublin 8.
Sir, – Breda O'Brien ("This twisting and tangling of family tree just the beginning", Opinion & Analysis, April 11th) chooses to ignore the fact that discrimination in Ireland is outlawed under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 and 2004, covering the workplace, and the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2004, which governs access to goods or services. Voting against civil marriage equality would do nothing to change these laws.
Whatever about American-style pizzas, I could do with a few less red herrings. – Yours, etc,
SÉAMUS DOOLEY,
Dublin 8.
Sir, – There is a cohort of people which intends voting No that is reluctant to express its opinions for fear of being labelled “bigots” or “homophobic”. While I disagree with these people’s viewpoints, they are entitled to express their opinions and should be able to do so without fear of any recriminations. I saw an example of this on social media over the weekend. A photo had been posted of some people with a large banner outside Galway cathedral urging people to vote No. There were many derogatory comments posted underneath, including the words I have mentioned above. I do not believe this kind of behaviour is helpful and may even alienate “soft” Yes voters.
For me the referendum, whatever you want to call it, is a very progressive move for Ireland, if passed. It will create a more equal society and young gay people will be able to see they are accepted as respected members of society.
A democratic ballot will be held and citizens will vote on what should or shouldn’t be in the Constitution. No one need feel marginalised because of views they are entitled to have. – Yours, etc,
TOMMY RODDY,
Galway.
Sir, – I agree with Niall Gubbins (April 14th) that the state is right to wish to discontinue the current two-tier system of civil marriage and civil partnership.
I think the opposition is semantic – marriage as traditionally understood by all major religions is the union of a man and woman for the primary, though not exclusive, purpose of begetting children and providing them with a secure and stable environment in which to grow up.
That members of the gay community want their long-term relationships recognised by the state is understandable but does not give them the right to redefine the word “marriage” and insist that others accept this new definition.
Perhaps the solution is for the state to abolish the term “marriage” altogether for the civil act, leaving it for the purely religious one in which it takes no interest.
Once this aspect is removed from the debate most of current rancour will dissipate and everyone will be able to carry on their lives without forcing their opinions on those who disagree. – Yours, etc,
MARTIN D STERN,
Salford, England.