Referendum on Gender Equality (THREADBANS IN OP)

But the term wake-up call usually implies that the recipient which change course in some way going forward and I'm not seeing how a defeat for one or both of these referendums prompts that for the government or the political establishment more generally. Would it inspire them to embrace, even in a limited way, more 'socially conservative' policies? I highly doubt it. Okay I can't see the next government, if it is FF/FG in some form, trying to adress the specific issues raised in these referenda again, but SF say they will...

The Ditch has apparently gotten hold of the Attorney Generals advice on the referendum wording.

What do you mean you never claimed the State will do as much as possible? This is what you said yesterday.

You have then subsequently said the state haven't honoured that guarantee. I'm confused.

You're confused because you are continuously misreading what I said.

I don't know at this stage are you just pretending that you don't understand? I'll play along again for the umpteenth time and again try to simplify it even more and you can then tell me where you think I am saying what you think I am saying.

Article 41.2 means the state should do as much as possible to allow parents to take care of their families in their home and not have to join the labour force due to financial necessity.

The state could be compelled to do a lot more to honour this Article.

They will. This is the proposed amendment

No they won't. The proposed amendment puts the provision of care onto the family alone. The State will have no Constitutional obligation to provide care either in or outside the home.

It provides that the State shall strive to support the provision of care by families. It is the first time the State will have a Constitutional obligation to involve themselves in striving to provide care.

They are already currently striving to provide care according to the education minister Norma Foley during her debate with Peadar Tobin.

The current Constitution clearly states that provision of care within the family is the sole responsibility of the mother(or father). The only responsibility on the State is to ensure they endeavour to provide some level of money for that.

So you do understand what it means!

There's no responsibility for the State to strive to provide support to for medical help, for money for adaptive accomodation changes, educational supports etc. The proposed amendment opens the door for cases to be taken by family members to push for those kinds of support

They can push for them as much as they are pushing for them now and will get the same results. As I said Norma Foley said last night that the State is already striving to support care so, unless the amendment says the state "will strive even harder than they do now", it will make no difference.

Finally, the current definition only covers a parent caring for their child. Care provided by married couples without kids, brother and sisters, parents to their grandparents etc are all excluded but with the new proposed amendment they would be included.

To be pedantic a married couple without kids are already a Constitutional Family.

The Irish version of the Constitution says "A mothers duties to her family/household" which means her duty to look after all members of her household which is a whole load of potential Supreme Court challenges now that the public have been made aware of its potential. It also includes a fathers duties by the way just to fend off your inevitable response.

You can include as many people as you want under the term durable relationship but it will not mean they will have any Constitutional or legal right to care support from the government either inside or outside the home.

If the irish People vote these amendments in I'll be so disappointed .

Sinn fein have failed as an opposition even if their advocating for yes they should have insisted on transparency and support Michael Mc Dowells freedom of information request .they should have objected the the guillotining of the bill in the Dail and promoted an open debate in the houses of the oreachtas.

So a No No vote is the only option for clear headed men and women .if they get away with this shoddy governance worse will follow .

We can go again with the proper wording.

Please vote No and No

So Article 41.2 means the State must do as much as they can to ensure parents take care fo their families within the homes yet they don't do that and no has compelled them to do that, for some reason. That's an amazing conclusion that the State must do that, especially when it's based on no evidence at all.

You're confusing yourself with the current Constitution. Again I'll post the proposed amendment for clarity.

"And shall strive to support such provision".

Of course it will make a difference, TDs and politicians say things that are legally incorrect all the time. This shouldn't be news to you. It's the whole reason we have a court system that is separate from Government. I'm surprised you've never hear of a court over turning a decision made by a government tbh.

I know, but married couples without kids are not mothers, hence the reason they are excluded from the terms of Article 41.2.2. The use of the word mother is quite clear that it means their role, shock horror, as a mother. Not their role as a daughter or a wife. Hence the reason there has never been a Constitutional challenge on that issue.

We are talking about the care referendum here. Durable relationships don't come into it.

Married couples without kids, brothers and sisters born to parents who are married, adult children looking after their married parents all come within the term family under the current Constitution and all are excluded from the coming under Article 41.2.2.

So Article 41.2 means the State must do as much as they can to ensure parents take care fo their families within the homes yet they don't do that and no has compelled them to do that, for some reason. That's an amazing conclusion that the State must do that, especially when it's based on no evidence at all.

I raise the white flag. I give up trying to explain it to you.

You're confusing yourself with the current Constitution. Again I'll post the proposed amendment for clarity.

"And shall strive to support such provision".

Nope I'm not in the least confused. The provision the state shall strive to support is the the provision of care, by members of a family to one another by reason of the bonds that exist among them. Where is the obligation on the state to strive to support care outside of the family?

Of course it will make a difference, TDs and politicians say things that are legally incorrect all the time. This shouldn't be news to you. It's the whole reason we have a court system that is separate from Government.

Ha ha ha ha. That's gas about TD's and politicians saying things that are legally incorrect especially in the context of this referendum.

I'm surprised you've never hear of a court over turning a decision made by a government tbh.

There you go making things up again. It really doesn't help your credibility. What makes you think I never heard of a court overturning a decision made by a government?

We are talking about the care referendum here. Durable relationships don't come into it.

Married couples without kids, brothers and sisters born to parents who are married, adult children looking after their married parents all come within the term family under the current Constitution and all are excluded from the coming under Article 41.2.2.

Sorry I don't know what you are trying to say here.

Anyone with even a little bit of sense that watched that 'debate' between McEntee and McDowell last night will be voting no on the 'durable relationship' issue. She literally hadn't got one proper factual counter argument and she's the Minister For Justice! Unbelievable ineptitude.

Ireland has undergone a social and legal revolution which was unimaginable to earlier generations but so many people are still stuck in a mental rut - “Ah, politicians are all the same, nuttin’ changes round here”!

Even when they want to delete “mothers” from the Constitution and turn families into any relationship that claims to be “durable”

The politicians certainly hope there are lots of voters like this poster who will forget all about this referendum fiasco come the real business of the elections in June.

Television and radio cannot broadcast the revelations in the Ditch due to our censorship laws.

Crazy.

Watching the RTE debate with Martin and Maria sheen again. It ages well. Towards the end should be archived for reeling in the years.

Sensational