[Article] Archbishop backs legal rights for gay couples

ixoy

[font=Verdana, Arial]Taken from today's Irish Independent:

THE Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, Dr Diarmuid Martin, appeared to give his approval yesterday to legal rights for couples, including homosexuals, who live in relationships other than marriage. The bold statement by the archbishop is the first of its kind from such a senior Catholic prelate in Ireland.

It came in response to comments made by Taoiseach Bertie Ahern who said that extending rights to gay couples in the areas of tax and inheritance was the "fairest" and "Christian way to deal with this".

Dr Martin told the Irish Independent: "I recognise that there are many different kinds of caring relationships and these often create dependencies for those involved. The State may feel in justice that the rights of people in these relationships need to be protected."

He emphasised he was not thinking mainly of homosexual relationships, but rather of caring, dependent relationships in general. At the same time, he said, he did not exclude homosexual relationships.

Dr Martin said: "I have a wide range of relationships in mind. I do not exclude gay relationships but my main concern is with all caring relationships where dependencies have come into being."

He said the rights "would primarily be inheritance and property."

To date, the only other statement by a senior Catholic bishop on the issue of gay civil unions came from Archbishop Sean Brady in May. Dr Brady appeared to rule out civil recognition of such unions when he said people can already "make private legal provision, covering many areas of their lives together, including joint ownership of homes, living wills and powers of attorney".

Archbishop Martin's comments on the issue appeared to gain support last night from Family & Life, a pro-marriage organisation with strong Catholic connections.

The organisation's David Manly said although the law "recognises marriage as a unique relationship between a man and a woman" and confers benefits on it for the sake of children, "an exception could be made for siblings, or two people who have become dependent on one another".

Mr Manly said in these cases "certain rights and protections could be granted".

He added: "It's irrelevant in this context whether there is a sexual aspect to the relationship. As far as the State is concerned the only relevant issue should be whether there is a relationship of care and dependency."

Fine Gael's spokesperson on social welfare and equality, Senator Sheila Terry, told the Taoiseach to "move on rights for same-sex couples now".

"The Taoiseach should stop mouthing platitudes on the rights of same-sex couples and introduce legislation to give them the equality they deserve."

So yet another body vouching for equal rights and a surprising one at that. If nothing else it should put some of the older sections of society in a more favorable disposition - the younger ones, I imagine, are mostly convinced or, as was said in Prime Time, are just not bothered.


[/font]

moridin

Equal Rights? I don't think so... a limited form of equality isn't really equality at all.

It's certainly a step in the right direction, especially coming from a senior clergyman, but there's a lot more to be concerned about than the "interitence and property" rights that he mentions.

Amnesiac_ie

"Equal rights?" No. They are clearly decalring that a homosexual relationship is lesser than that "special" one between a married man and a woman.

ixoy

Amnesiac_ie wrote:

"Equal rights?" No. They are clearly decalring that a homosexual relationship is lesser than that "special" one between a married man and a woman.

Nope but for now the discourse is going to be focused on issues of legality. The action was taken on grounds of taxes and inheritenace rights and the biscop seems to be supporting those. Other areas come at a later stage - I'm of the mindset it's too idealistic to get all at once.

What is important though is that unions are not perceived as substandard in terms of morales, or ethics, or that people in unions are no less committed than those in marriages. Church would obviously disagree but thankfully they're no longer the arbiter of public taste...

Yoda

moridin wrote:

Equal Rights? I don't think so... a limited form of equality isn't really equality at all.

Zero plus one is greater than zero.

moridin

Well currently, as damien pointed out on saturday, it's illegal for a same sex couple to get married in Ireland.

It'll be interesting to see whether they rule if same sex marriages which have been ratified by another country will be viewed as valid over here in relation to taxes etc... and that's what's being challanged in the courts at the moment, not the right for irish same sex couples to get married.

dictatorcat

We can't expect everything at once, we should expect equal rights but realistically we're not going to get them yet, not when our country has such a conservative past and our government parties don't want to lose votes. However we should acccept this one small step for irish legislation, one giant leap for irish society. The important thing is that we don't give up the fight for equal rights and allow this small yet somewhat significant step to cause many in the gay community to sit back and say "we have enough now!" We don't.

I think the big thing to capitalise on here is that the church, those men in frocks who condemn us to hell, have given up a little bit of ground. If the most conservative group in the country can say something positive like this it is a sign of one of two things: either they genuinely support our cause or more cynically (prehaps more realistically) they are trying to appease us. Government bills such as the Civil Registration Act of 2004 strongly suggest this.

The surprising thing is that everyone appears to be on our side whatever the motivation (except perhaps the Healey-Ray's)!!!! Whats going on!!

moridin

dictatorcat wrote:

I think the big thing to capitalise on here is that the church, those men in frocks who condemn us to hell, have given up a little bit of ground. If the most conservative group in the country can say something positive like this it is a sign of one of two things: either they genuinely support our cause or more cynically (prehaps more realistically) they are trying to appease us. Government bills such as the Civil Registration Act of 2004 strongly suggest this.

How is the Civil Registration Act of 2004 suggestive of appeasement, when it's the one piece of legislation that specifically says that you cannot marry someone of the same sex?

dictatorcat

moridin wrote:

How is the Civil Registration Act of 2004 suggestive of appeasement, when it's the one piece of legislation that specifically says that you cannot marry someone of the same sex?

Sorry, my bad I should learn to structure things. What i mean is that while they're appeasing us with one hand they're taking our right to equality back with the other. I ment to use the Civil Registration Act of 2004 as an example of how what they're saying now is just keep us happy while they've already taken away some of our rights.

moridin

*nods*