Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Referendum on Gender Equality (THREADBANS IN OP)

Options
13637394142124

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,436 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure


    To be fair, that's nothing to do with wether this referendum passes or not



  • Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    🤣🤣🤣

    What the Irish Constitution says has nothing to with all this anti trans conspiracy drivel

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Random anti trans conspiracies are nothing to do with the constitution or this referendum

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    The same groups trying to tell people that there shouldn't be any limits on illegal immigrants or asylum seekers it's all a far right conspiracy,

    Sound familiar



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,197 ✭✭✭Hamsterchops


    Referendum on Gender equality?

    So why delete any reference to one gender while keeping the other? Not very equal is it.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,718 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    Hotblack is right though, the Preamble isn’t part of the Constitution, it’s like the foreword before we get to the meaty stuff that is actually the Constitution, as acknowledged by the Constitutional review group way back in 1996:

    The Constitutional Review group agrees that the Preamble, while not an essential part of the Constitution, ‘expresses a sense of national identity and destiny’, and reflects the ethos of the 1930s, which is ‘overly Roman Catholic and nationalist in tone, is gender-biased, and would be objectionable to many in Ireland today’.


    The author also goes on to point out that:

    While there are several mentions of the role of women in the home and as mothers (Articles 40.3.3 and 41.2.1 and 2), the word ‘father’ is nowhere to be found.

    https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/079160359800800101

    At the time, one of the recommendations of the review group was to delete the Preamble.



  • Registered Users Posts: 377 ✭✭whatisayis


    You are absolutely correct. The Constitution grants both women and men the right to fair paid and safe employment but doesn't oblige them to work.

    Don't know how 45 changed to 95! I have a new phone and the predictive text has it's own mind it seems! I agree it's only a guide but it negates the constant claim that the Constitution obliges women to stay at home and that they do not have the choice to be where they want to be.

    Post edited by whatisayis on


  • Registered Users Posts: 968 ✭✭✭Str8outtaWuhan


    Not an essential part ≠ not a part, just so we are clear. Even the review group said so . It is part of the constitution and some might argue sets the tone for every article, seeing as it's at the beginning.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,718 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    Just so we are clear - not part of the Constitution, essential or otherwise, which is why it was recommended that it could be deleted. The Constitution, which begins with Article 1, would remain intact, including the aforementioned Article 45 which is not an essential part of the Constitution, but it’s nice that it’s in there to guide the Oireachtas in regards to social policy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 968 ✭✭✭Str8outtaWuhan


    The preamble is in the constitution, when you buy a copy of it or are given it every version has the preamble. The committee you quoted backs up that while not important it is still "part of" the constitution. So after this referendum only men will be referenced, no women or mothers, only men and fathers and lords and jesus our lord and saviour.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 377 ✭✭whatisayis


    That's an interesting point. As it stands at the moment stay at home mothers or fathers, where a spouse is in employment, can get SW credits but no money until their youngest is 12. After that they have to be available for work to sign on even if it's only for credits.

    Single parents can receive the one parent family payment until their youngest is 7 without the requirement of being available for work. After that they have to be available for work to receive payment.

    Don't know how the arbitrary age differences came about but both married and unmarried parents will have to be treated equally. I can't see them raising the one parent family age to 12 as they have gradually lowered it from 18 to 7.



  • Registered Users Posts: 367 ✭✭Iguarantee


    My wife is owns two discrete businesses, running them part-time and also minds our children part-time.

    I have my own business.

    Neither of us have the spare time or the inclination to care about this referendum. The government has done the sum total of **** all for any of the three (very different) businesses we own.

    I’d like to hear about gender equality from people who don’t have too much time on their hands, from people who don’t go protest because they’ve **** all else to do and from people who live in the actual, real world



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,718 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    I don’t care where you pick it up, I don’t need to because I can cite it from memory in both English and as Gaeilge, and I’m familiar with the history of it, and the Preamble isn’t part of it. The article I linked to which cites the committee, backs up the the fact that it is not part of the constitution, which they were asked to review, but they still wished to recommend that it be deleted anyway.

    I’m also familiar with Dev’s “I carried a watermelon” moment:

    I took out the phrase ‘without the distinction of sex’ and I make no apology for this’

    https://amp.rte.ie/amp/1412016/


    And as for the idea that after the referendum that only men will be referenced, it’s already been pointed out that Article 45 remains, which IS part of the constitution, albeit not an essential part of the constitution:

    https://www.thejournal.ie/factcheck-women-in-home-referendum-erase-irish-constitution-6279204-Jan2024/


    The amendment is an attempt to recognise the fact that it is not just woman by her life within the home giving to the State support without which the common good cannot be achieved, but rather there are men who do too, and not just in the home, but as a family, the support they give to each other, without which the common good cannot be achieved.

    There were always men who by their life within the home gave to the State support without which the common good could not be achieved, but this was never previously acknowledged, because the Constitution was written with the intent of upholding traditional social structures such as the family based upon marriage between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation. We know of course from history that the Constitution was not based upon the reality of Irish society at the time, rather it was based upon an idealised vision of Irish society.

    The referendum was necessary, the problem is that the proposed amendments are still idealistic and aspirational in nature, still failing miserably to reflect the reality of Irish society.



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    If you think inheritance conflict is fanciful, you should speak to a solicitor. It's relatively common, and this inclusion of additional relationships will make those conflicts both more likely and more complicated.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,676 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    No it won't. The courts regularly deal with inheritance and will disputes. The constitutional definition of family doesn't come into it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,697 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    OK, and how does that affect women in real life? Should trans men have their own separate hospitals, to make people like you happy?



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    How does that effect women in real life...

    I'd suggest that you actually ask women what they think and get back to me



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,697 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    I did. They asked would any services be changed, no, so no issue then 🙄



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,676 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    It's not being changed for inheritance purposes.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,676 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    It's been discussed here on thread for pages. You could read through it. Then you could read any articles and publications, from reputable sources, legal people etc

    then make your own mind up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,603 ✭✭✭...Ghost...


    It does use male (he/his/him) pro-nouns though 😂

    6 In every case in which the President decides that a Bill the subject of a petition under this Article does not contain a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people thereon ought to be ascertained, he shall inform the Taoiseach and the Chairman of each House of the Oireachtas accordingly in writing under his hand and Seal, and such Bill shall be signed by the President not later than eleven days after the date on which the Bill shall have been deemed to have been passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas and shall be duly promulgated by him as a law.

    Stay Free



  • Registered Users Posts: 174 ✭✭abozzz


    Who in their right mind looked at the many, many issues of import of this country and thought "yeah, this is worthwhile"

    Genuine question, BTW.

    Who pushed for this? Who presented this idea for a referendum, who checked it out, and who gave this the green light? How much money and time and effort is sunk into this?

    Surely this type of wanton luxury gobbledygook needs some kind of investigation because otherwise what's next? A referendum on one sugar or two?



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,407 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    I’d urge you to make the time and go vote No then- it’s very important our voices are heard and not the far left demagogues pushing this stuff



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,099 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Yep that sounds all too familiar. FWIW I'll be voting no on both counts, can't see any compelling reason for change and various possible unintended (or maybe intended) consequences.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,953 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Another feeling I have about this referendum is that it is for the good of Government finances, wokeness, and gender woo. I cannot see any positives. If someone can point them out to me I will take adequate note.

    In the meantime I'm awaiting the Ref Commissions booklet on the pros and cons, which is obligatory now. Should make for an interesting read, and I hope it is not filled with obfuscation and wishy washy stuff.

    I'm waiting to see what is said. But I am voting NO as of now unless I am persuaded and convinced otherwise which I doubt. That is because I just don't trust the Government on much at the moment. Railroading decisions regarding the siting of immigrant accommodation is one aspect that has the feeling of psychopathy about it. No consultation with anyone and we don't care at all what people think, we'll just call them Nazis or the more polite term Far Right to get our way. Just an example.

    Nope. I'm wary of the reasoning behind it all, notwithstanding the recommendations of the Citizen Assembly. I'm not sure either that they are fully independent of Government sway on matters. But I am told that they most definitely are. I must look to see if the recommendations are fully covered in the referendum wording or not. But I'm jaded at the moment and can't be ar$ed tonight.

    Cynicism and questioning are the tools I have, so if my questions are not answered in the booklet, it stays NOPE for me. But we'll see.



  • Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭DaSchmo


    The ratios (hostile comments, reposts etc vs views and likes) on some of the social media posts promoting yes are quite something, particularly the green party, womens council and of course O'Gorman's own social accounts. Quite unfortunate for the government that Roddy is the front man for the thing considering he must be there or thereabouts the most universally disliked government politician at the moment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    I didnt know the Communists were promoting this

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,407 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Seen as all the government, “opposition”, their media and NGO cronies are then that would be a resounding yes



Advertisement