Is there going to be a referendum on same sex marriage next year?

Freiheit

Did I catch Enda Kenny correctly? did he say it will be dealt with by referendum next year?.

L.Jenkins

When did he say this? Still waiting on the sad excuse for Gender Recognition to be followed through on. If it does go ahead, maybe both Enda and Joan will listen to those who know what we want and need.

Annasopra

There will be a constitutional convention that will look at various issue of reform including same sex marriage

jaffacakesyum

Really? Does anyone have any links to news articles regarding this? I never heard about it at all.

Rev Hellfire

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Really? Does anyone have any links to news articles regarding this? I never heard about it at all.

Behold the power of google.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/govt-intends-to-examine-constitutional-issues-in-2012-533935.html

Killer Pigeon

Why should there need to be an election on people's rights in the first place, these sort of things shouldn't be up for election - they should be a given. Anyway, I don't think you need a referendum because there's nothing in the constitution that forbids same-sex marriages in the first place, it's government legislation that does. Same-sex marriages can be legalised through the Oireachtas. I imagine biased supreme court judges would disagree - as they did during the early 90s during the campaign for the decriminalisation of homosexuality. Feasibly, same-sex marriages could be legalised during one Dáil & Seanad sitting, and sign into law by President Higgins in the morning (who I'm sure wouldn't object as to its constitutionality).

Plautus

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

Why should there need to be an election on people's rights in the first place, these sort of things shouldn't be up for election - they should be a given. Anyway, I don't think you need a referendum because there's nothing in the constitution that forbids same-sex marriages in the first place, it's government legislation that does. Same-sex marriages can be legalised through the Oireachtas. I imagine biased supreme court judges would disagree - as they did during the early 90s during the campaign for the decriminalisation of homosexuality. Feasibly, same-sex marriages could be legalised during one Dáil & Seanad sitting, and sign into law by President Higgins in the morning (who I'm sure wouldn't object as to its constitutionality).

It's hard to say how the Supreme Court would divide on the issue. It's definitely a better bench than in the 90s when only Henchy dissented in Norris v. Ireland. They've also shown their hand in the likes of Roche v. Roche [2009] - http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/supreme-court-rules-against-woman-in-frozen-embryo-case-438340.html

Denham is from the more liberal wing, and so are Macken, McKechnie and O'Donnell while Hardiman would probably be from the school that put 'progressive' in Progressive Democrat: at least on some social issues involving prohibitions. He might not be your man if you were looking for the extension of positive liberties.

The wording in Article 41 is definitely ambiguous or amenable to argument - it is not clear at all that there is a prohibition on same-sex marriage due to the gender-neutral language (despite what Lucinda Creighton believes.)

Same sex marriage, ideally, shouldn't even require primary legislation if a judicial review of Irish civil marriage practice was taken on the grounds of equality under the law. It has been: it's just we're still waiting on the Zappone v. Revenue Commissioners appeal.

The High Court decision in that:
http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2006/H404.html

Killer Pigeon

Also, I'd like to add a different perspective in regard to a referendum.

You have to be very careful when suggesting a referendum on same-sex marriages. It could give the establishment a chance to frame a referendum that asks the people if the constitution should or should not allow same-sex marriages (or near enough to those exact terms). Alarm bells should immediately ring.

In this scenario, there is a risk that the constitution could be permanently altered against same-sex marriage; a constitution that, at present, technically doesn't discriminate against same-sex marriages. If the should not side wins in this hypothetical election, it would mean that yet another referendum would be needed to legalise same-sex marriages. In my opinion, such a referendum should not be held.

Fine Gael (one of the most traditionalist/socially conservative parties in the Dáil) has a majority stake in government and they (along with the Labour party) have already tried to attack people's rights and judicial powers through a referendum (30th amendment) this year. I wouldn't be surprised if the hypothetical referendum I outlined previously comes to fruition.

I think that socially conservative elements in this country (churches, other religious groups, etc.) could push a well choreographed campaigned, based on the "preserving the traditional definition of marriage" argument, and would be posed to win such a referendum. If they did, the legalisation of same-sex marriages could be pushed back nearly a decade and any future campaign to legalise it would not only be based on altering the constitution but also altering legislation. As it stands, legalisation of same-sex marriages is only a matter of altering government legislation (Edit: Or what Plautus alludes to above).

So to summarise, a referendum on same-sex marriages could give those against same-sex marriages more of an opportunity than they have now to block its legalisation.

LegacyUser

I agree with KP, if it goes ahead and the no side wins (against it that is, which is likely imo) it could be detrimental.

Currently are you allowed to marry in a same sex marriage in Ireland in a registrar office? Or is it just that the Constitution does not say it is not allowed?

Plautus

legality wrote: »

I agree with KP, if it goes ahead and the no side wins (against it that is, which is likely imo) it could be detrimental.

Currently are you allowed to marry in a same sex marriage in Ireland in a registrar office? Or is it just that the Constitution does not say it is not allowed?

Currently the state will only marry a man to a woman, and will not recognise legal same-sex marriages from outside of the jurisdiction either. Which is at the heart of the Zappone case (recognition of a Canadian same-sex marriage for the purpose of tax registration.) The constitutional question is one which is sub judice - the Supreme Court simply has not deigned to resolve it yet. The government however does believe it is acting constitutionally.

Feasibly, another avenue to be pursued might be that of a couple with a legal same-sex marriage in another EU member state (say in Belgium, The Netherlands, Portugal or Spain) arguing that EU treaty rights conferred on spouses are not being vindicated by Irish non-recognition. That would (ultimately) be an ECJ case (Zappone might still appeal to the ECHR after exhausting the Supreme Court in the event of an adverse verdict.) I imagine that the court will have to weigh up the argument of an Irish government that registration for civil partnership provides a satisfactory remedy.

Long story short, Zappone or an analogous judicial review might give us gay marriage in a round-about way. We'd just all have to rush off to the Algarve (I'm assuming Portugal will marry non-Portuguese nationals to each other, of course, maybe they don't.)

Annasopra

Plautus wrote: »

Currently the state will only marry a man to a woman, and will not recognise legal same-sex marriages from outside of the jurisdiction either.

They are strictly speaking recognised as civil partnerships but not marriages