Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To rally Irish voters here and ask is anyone voting No tomorrow?

415 replies

LayMeDown · 21/05/2015 14:13

I know there's lots of Irish on MN. I don't know anyone in RL voting No. But polls indicates it's tightening a lot. I'm getting scared it won't pass and my lovely brother and his partner will be left out in the cold again. What are you all hearing in your circles?

FYI for any non Irish there is a referendum tomorrow on introducing same sex marriage in Ireland.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
GeorgeYeatsAutomaticWriter · 22/05/2015 18:27

Marriage is in the Irish Constitution. Civil Partnership is not. The 'family' (with or without children) as constituted by marriage is afforded special protection under the Irish Constitution.

OrangeVase · 22/05/2015 18:29

I see that, (obvs - or why the vote!). But in terms of the actual contract between two people what is the difference? That was my question.

OrangeVase · 22/05/2015 18:31

Sorry - son just arrived - will have to come back to this

Andrewofgg · 22/05/2015 18:31

madreloco You say Even asking the question should gay people be allowed the same protections under the law regarding marriage and family is unconstitutional.

Presumably Ireland has laws about prohibited degrees, a minimum age, and so on? In fact I believe it is 18 now, 17 in Northern Ireland, 16 in England Wales with parental permission, and 16 in Scotland without - which is what used to bring so many English couples to Gretna.

So is Ireland refusing rights to people of 16 or 17, or first cousins if they are not allowed to marry?

Don't get me wrong; wile it's none of my business I hope Ireland votes Yes. But I can't see how it's wrong even to ask.

GeorgeYeatsAutomaticWriter · 22/05/2015 18:34

Orangevase Marriage Equality has identified over 160 statutory differences here

madreloco · 22/05/2015 20:07

andrew because the constitution guarantees equal legal treatment to all adult citizens. So even asking if the laws protecting married couples should be extended to all adult citizens could be argued to be unconstitutional. Article 40.1 already promises me equal treatment, so why ask if I should get equal treatment?

chaletdays · 22/05/2015 20:10

Am I wrong to be depressed that so many young people travelled for abroad or registered to vote in order to vote yes to the Marriage Referendum, but so many of those same people didn't bother to travel or vote in the referendum on Children's rights Sad

chaletdays · 22/05/2015 20:11

'from' abroad.

Moln · 22/05/2015 20:16

OrangeVase "Marriage is a sacrement and does involve God"

No it isn't, and no it doesn't. Because this is about civil marriage and not the religious ceremony that surrounds the legal part of marriage.

RedLentil · 22/05/2015 20:21

Saoirse, the age referendum is v. unlikely to pass. As I say, I've never spoilt before not missed a vote. I thought about it long and hard. For me, as a feminist and someone who has been active in debates about the constitution for a long time, making a gesture a lot of other people will make too to push for a change that will make a big difference to women matters to me.

It was something I thought long and hard about, and I can't foresee a situation where I'd ever spoil a paper again.

Aermingers · 22/05/2015 20:24

Does Ireland still have the second house you're only allowed to vote for if you're a graduate?

clearlyaplasticgonome · 22/05/2015 20:33

Yes. What's that got to do with the discussion in hand?

madreloco · 22/05/2015 20:43

Its not that simple. Six of the 60 senators in the Seanad are elected by two of the national universities. Eleven are appointed by the Taoiseach, and the rest are nominated via vocational panels. What is the relevance here though?

frumpet · 22/05/2015 20:48

I am always a bit Hmm at people who are happy to deny anyone the same rights as themselves , especially when the premise of denying those rights is built on such flimsy arguments .

Most people , even those voting no , would agree that people who are gay are from the same species , that on a day to day level , gay people are in fact going about their daily lives in much the same way as straight people .
Gay people wake up after 7 or 8 hours sleep , wish they could have another 30 minutes in bed , but like straight people get up anyway , they spend the same amount of time having a wee and a poo , having a shower or a wash and getting dressed . They have breakfast or not like straight people , they go out the door and go to work , they are bored by their commute just like straight people , they are possibly bored by their work like straight people , they spend a little too much time on social media etc , like straight people and wonder what's for tea like straight people . They sometimes go to the pub after work like straight people and sometimes they go home and stick their jammies on and watch shite telly like straight people . Sometimes their partners annoy the living daylights out of them , like straight people . Sometimes they might not have sex with that partner for weeks , like a straight person . But because of the small percentage of time they choose to touch the genitals of someone of the same sex whilst going about their lives in exactly the same way as a straight person, they are forbidden from having the same rights as a straight person .

Nope doesn't make sense to me at all Sad

clearlyaplasticgonome · 22/05/2015 20:52

I agree with Chalet. Where were all these concerned young people when we were voting on the rights of children. I have serious doubts about the commitment of these people who make a big deal about 'travelling home to do their duty' or registering to vote, for a very 'right on' cause, but can't be arsed for something as fundamental as children's rights.

chaletdays · 22/05/2015 21:07

I know. I was just looking at a young guy with a back pack explaining earnestly why he had to come home 'for the first time' to vote in a referendum. Children's rights are obviously not high on his agenda!

madreloco · 22/05/2015 21:17

Not the same thing at all. What real change to anything did the childrens rights referendum provide for? None at all. And it passed comfortably anyway.

Why do you have to shoot down a wonderful thing by complaining about something unconnected?

chaletdays · 22/05/2015 21:20

Yes and the marriage referendum will pass comfortably anyway.

Just wondering why citizens went to the trouble of travelling miles to vote on one referendum but not on the other, despite them both concerning fellow citizens.

That's not shooting down a wonderful thing. It's a valid question.

chaletdays · 22/05/2015 21:21

Oh and how can you say that the children's referendum did not provide for real change. Seriously????

Original poster
LayMeDown · 22/05/2015 21:22

The thing is though this one is much easier for people to identify with. Most people know a guy person who will be directly impacted by this. The same was not true of the children's referendum. Although establishing the principal of the best interests of the child was very important it only had a big impact on a relatively small number of families and even then was not immediate. You would have had to have a fairly good understanding of the legal implications of the Constitution as it stood to grasp the significance of the referendum. Living abroad would have made that all the harder.

OP posts:
Original poster
LayMeDown · 22/05/2015 21:27

Also the guy you mentioned chalet. I think you're being harsh on him. If he is still eligible to vote he has probably only left Ireland in last 18 months, which means he more than likely was in Ireland and voted in that referendum in 2013.

OP posts:
chaletdays · 22/05/2015 21:28

So basically it is okay for voters to turn out for one vulnerable group but to not vote regarding another vulnerable group because they can't be arsed to do their civic duty and explore the issues.

Basically, I don't know any vulnerable children but I have gay friends so I will fly home to vote on this issue and make out I'm a concerned citizen doing my civic duty?
It wasn't hard to access information on the children's referendum and realise the real vulnerability and heartbreak that needed to be dealt with. But obviously a lot of people couldn't be bothered, given the difference in the turn out.
That is very depressing, regardless of what way you voted today.

BathtimeFunkster · 22/05/2015 21:29

andrew because the constitution guarantees equal legal treatment to all adult citizens.

Well, except for women.

The Irish Constitution is will still be a shameful legal framework for any modern country if this referendum passes.

The very idea of marriage having constitutional protections is quite offensive.

Sure, if you're going to have them, offer them to gay couples too.

But the idea that today will create equality in a country, the constitution of which denies basic human rights to all women of childbearing age, is a fucking insult, frankly.

madreloco · 22/05/2015 21:30

What substantive change was made by the Thirty-First Amendment to the constitution? If you think there was one you didn't understand it.

chaletdays · 22/05/2015 21:30

No laymedown he mentioned that he 'registered to vote and came home'.

Swipe left for the next trending thread