How will you vote in the Marriage Equality referendum? Mod Note Post 1

seamus

gravehold wrote: »

Discrimination laws won't allow it, if gays are married they are equal so the discrimination law will make it so they can adopt like the straights.

You can keep stating it all you want, doesn't make it true.

There is nothing to prevent legalisation of discrimination where it comes to adoption.

Ave Sodalis

gravehold wrote: »

Discrimination laws won't allow it, if gays are married they are equal so the discrimination law will make it so they can adopt like the straights.

If the parents are unsuitable, they won't be allowed to adopt. No matter who they are.

gravehold

eviltwin wrote: »

Adoption isn't mentioned in the constitution. Why can't it be changed? Married couples don't have an automatic right to adopt, if they aren't suitable they don't get approval, same will happen with gay couples so what is the issue?

If gay get married discrimination law will come into effect, while if they are just CP you can preference married couples and it's not discriminatory.

Sure a future government will need to revert the current childrens act but that is easy

eviltwin

gravehold wrote: »

Discrimination laws won't allow it, if gays are married they are equal so the discrimination law will make it so they can adopt like the straights.

They still have to meet the criteria set out by the AAI.

Hyzepher

gravehold wrote: »

Discrimination laws won't allow it, if gays are married they are equal so the discrimination law will make it so they can adopt like the straights.

You do know that you dont have to be married to adopt, right?

smash

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

I thought they were going to take the children away from unsuspecting mothers in the park leaving behind a stack of 50s?

No wait, thats surrogacy.

A no campaigner on Newstalk yesterday was talking about surrogacy and said that all the children saved after the earthquake in Haiti were from surrogate mothers and that they were being shipped off to gay couples. I shít you not... You might find it in here http://www.newstalk.com/listen_back/8/18413/07th_May_2015_-_Moncrieff_Part_3/

B_Wayne

gravehold wrote: »

Discrimination laws won't allow it, if gays are married they are equal so the discrimination law will make it so they can adopt like the straights.

Just one question, what's wrong with gay people adopting? Nobody has ever shown a tangible reason to prevent it. The legislation is unlikely to ever remove gay people adopting as the majority of research shows they're as good parents as any other.

gravehold

seamus wrote: »

You can keep stating it all you want, doesn't make it true.

There is nothing to prevent legalisation of discrimination where it comes to adoption.

Yes there is hence you can put married people at the top of the list, you won't be able to say a straight married couple before a gay one. But if the gay ones only have cp they can be slotted in behind the straight couple.

eviltwin

gravehold wrote: »

If gay get married discrimination law will come into effect, while if they are just CP you can preference married couples and it's not discriminatory.

Sure a future government will need to revert the current childrens act but that is easy

Marriage isn't one of the criteria for adoption. I doubt it's even relevant anymore. Do you not think the AAI look at more important aspects than the marital status of the couple.

Ave Sodalis

gravehold wrote: »

Yes there is hence you can put married people at the top of the list, you won't be able to say a straight married couple before a gay one. But if the gay ones only have cp they can be slotted in behind the straight couple.

But that's not how it works...

seamus

gravehold wrote: »

If gay get married discrimination law will come into effect, while if they are just CP you can preference married couples and it's not discriminatory.

What discrimination law is this? Quote us the piece of legislation that means it's impossible to create another piece of legislation allowing discrimination in certain cases.

Yes there is hence you can put married people at the top of the list, you won't be able to say a straight married couple before a gay one.

Of course you can. Why not? What leads you to believe this is not possible?

SireOfSeth

gravehold wrote: »

If gay get married discrimination law will come into effect, while if they are just CP you can preference married couples and it's not discriminatory.

Sure a future government will need to revert the current childrens act but that is easy

NOT discriminatory!?! Are you even listening to yourself? How is it not discrimination?

Hyzepher

gravehold wrote: »

Yes there is hence you can put married people at the top of the list, you won't be able to say a straight married couple before a gay one. But if the gay ones only have cp they can be slotted in behind the straight couple.

Please stop peddling this untruth. At the moment there is no order of preference between eligible groups.

gravehold

B_Wayne wrote: »

Just one question, what's wrong with gay people adopting? Nobody has ever shown a tangible reason to prevent it. The legislation is unlikely to ever remove gay people adopting as the majority of research shows they're as good parents as any other.

The question is will yes effect adoption like the no sides says and the answer is yes. Yes people are saying it has no effect so should be verboten to talk about.

The yes side are wrong on this in the debates

eviltwin

gravehold wrote: »

Yes there is hence you can put married people at the top of the list, you won't be able to say a straight married couple before a gay one. But if the gay ones only have cp they can be slotted in behind the straight couple.

How do you know this. There is no preference for marriage in adoption according to the AAI website.

Maximus Alexander

gravehold wrote: »

Yes there is hence you can put married people at the top of the list, you won't be able to say a straight married couple before a gay one.

You absolutely would be able to do that, if you hated gays more than you cared about the welfare of children.

endacl

gravehold wrote: »

The question is will yes effect adoption like the no sides says and the answer is yes. Yes people are saying it has no effect so should be verboten to talk about.

The yes side are wrong on this in the debates

You do realise that if you took an hour off from posting, the Internet would become measurably smarter?

One eyed Jack

gravehold wrote: »

So the married straight couple get preference over the gay couple who cannot adopt

It wasn't because a couple were gay that they weren't eligible for adoption btw. Heterosexual cohabiting couples were also prohibited from applying jointly to adopt a child (my friend who is cohabiting with her boyfriend for years, had to apply solely to adopt a child they had fostered. They could not apply as a couple).

The relevant section of the Children and Family Relationship Act 2015 you're looking for is this bit -

The Bill amends the Adoption Act 2010 to extend its provisions
to civil partners and cohabiting couples. Civil partners and cohabiting
couples, where the latter have lived together for three years, will
have the right to apply jointly to adopt a child. It provides for such
couples to be subject to the same assessment processes and eligibility
criteria as for married couples. It also makes provisions for a civil
partnered or a same-sex cohabiting couple to place a child for
adoption where that child is the child of both of them. The Bill
provides for civil partners and cohabiting couples to be eligible for
adoptive leave.

Source: https://www.iasw.ie/attachments/Children_and_Family_Relationships_Bill_Explanatory_Memorandum_2015.pdf

The situation for unmarried couples under the terms of the Adoption Act 2010 are set out below -

Unmarried couples may not jointly adopt a child. A joint adoption by a couple is only possible where that couple is married and living together. This rule prevents an unmarried couple from jointly adopting a child even where one of the parties is the biological or legal parent of the child. There are no proposals to change adoption law in Ireland to permit adoption by unmarried couples.

Under the adoption legislation, it is possible for a single person to adopt if the Adoption Authority considers it desirable and it must regard the welfare of the child as its first and paramount consideration. This means that if you are living with a same-sex or opposite-sex partner, you may apply to the Authority to adopt a child in your own right, intending to raise the child with your partner. However, your partner would have no legal rights in relation to the child. The fact you are in a relationship is relevant only when evaluating circumstances that might affect the child's welfare.

For a foreign adoption to be recognised in Ireland, it must comply with the definition of adoption in Irish law. This means that the rule that only married couples may jointly adopt will apply.

Source: http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/cohabiting_couples/adoption_and_unmarried_couples.html

Maximus Alexander

endacl wrote: »

You do realise that if you took an hour off from posting, the Internet would become measurably smarter?

That's bullying. :eek:

gravehold

Hyzepher wrote: »

Please stop peddling this untruth. At the moment there is no order of preference between eligible groups.

aai.gov.ie/index.php/domestic-adoption/faq-domestic-adoption.html


(a) a married couple living together; this is the only circumstance where the law permits the adoption of a child by more than one person;


(b) a married person alone; in this circumstance the spouse’s consent to adopt must be obtained unless they are living apart and are separated under (i) a court decree or (ii) deed of separation or (iii) the spouse has deserted the prospective adopter or (iv) conduct on the part of the spouse results in the prospective adopter with just cause leaving the spouse and living apart;


(c) the mother, father or relative of the child (relative meaning a grandparent, brother, sister, uncle or aunt of the child and /or the spouse of any such person, the relationship to the child being traced through the mother or the father);


(d) a widow or widower

Only way a gay can adopt in from there is as sibling and he cannot do it as a couple his his bf.

Married couples get preference

gravehold

endacl wrote: »

You do realise that if you took an hour off from posting, the Internet would become measurably smarter?

I work from the internet I am working right now.

seamus

Gravehold, you're either wilfully ignorant or plain lying.

So what do I call you? Ignoramus, or liar?

mickydoomsux

gravehold wrote: »

I work from the internet I am working right now.

Are you a Cyberminer?

Lt J.R. Bell

floggg wrote: »

The SC accepted the common law definition without considering the same sex issue because it was never asked the question.If and when it is asked the question (unlikely now) it would then be necessary to reconsider the issue from a different angle which may we produce different results.

The old case will be persausive, but it will not be bound by it as it did not consider the issue.

The constitution is also a living document - something referenced in the high court case.

Indeed the HC indicated its decision may have been different if more countries had allowed for same sex marriage. At that time there were only 6 or 7. Now we are up to circa 20 - including most of the common law systems usually cited by the irish courts including NZ, Canada, UK and Scotland, South Africa and most of the US (which soon may be all of it).

So I would be fairly confident that the SC would at least find same sex marriage compatible with the Constitution, if not constitutionally required.

And I never failed to acknowledge the previous cases (they were referred to in posts I'm sure I quoted). I just (accurately) pointed out that they had never considered this issue. Which made you choke on your sandwich even though you agreed with me.

And I believe they were going back to the HC after that SC ruling to start the process over as the SC denied them the opportunity to add arguments to the appeal.

If I recall correctly the original question is pretty narrow and applied to Revenue recognition only, rather than any wider question.

There is absolutely no basis for believing that this Current Composition of the Supreme Court would accept that marriage = gays too, even when using the living document interpretation tool. Hence, the "choking on the sambo"

Most of the Common Law jurisdictions have abortion on demand, we don't , so to suggest that just because they have it , our Courts would follow suit is not guaranteed. They still have to considered the other interpretation tools. Also, gay marriage is still not universally accepted. To suggest otherwise is bonkers (let's remember, very few of those States dared to put the matter before the people and made a big deal of it in their pre election manifesto) Wow a whole 20 countries, out of how many ?

Despite the denials of some posters, including gay into marriage would be dramatically redefining it. It would create a new human right for gays. It's being over 20 years since the Supreme Court, some of whom are still sitting, were prepared to recognise new rights, despite the living document interpretation tool. Not saying it's beyond impossible, what is saying is, there is a certain attitude in the Current Court about "over stepping" the mark into "judicial activism". I am not saying that is right or acceptable, I am just predicting the likelihood of what would happen. You don't just get rid of a traditional understanding of a term in one quick swoop on foot of "science" and "evidence" that has NOT being accepted by even the ECtHR or seriously challenged in a Court of Law


"Different angles " Eh, the Living Document Interpretation Tool , is more or less the only angle

The HC acknowledged that other countries didn't have SSM. It did not say things would be different if....... That was not it's remit. It was asked to take the Constitution as a living document in light of the laws there and then on the day of the hearing, and not what might happen in other countries a few days later... It found that their arguments did not in fact match with the official position on ssm in other jurisdictions

endacl

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

That's bullying. :eek:

Not really. It won't be read and considered. Like all the other responses they've had.

eviltwin

gravehold wrote: »

aai.gov.ie/index.php/domestic-adoption/faq-domestic-adoption.html


(a) a married couple living together; this is the only circumstance where the law permits the adoption of a child by more than one person;


(b) a married person alone; in this circumstance the spouse’s consent to adopt must be obtained unless they are living apart and are separated under (i) a court decree or (ii) deed of separation or (iii) the spouse has deserted the prospective adopter or (iv) conduct on the part of the spouse results in the prospective adopter with just cause leaving the spouse and living apart;


(c) the mother, father or relative of the child (relative meaning a grandparent, brother, sister, uncle or aunt of the child and /or the spouse of any such person, the relationship to the child being traced through the mother or the father);


(d) a widow or widower

Only way a gay can adopt in from there is as sibling and he cannot do it as a couple his his bf.

Married couples get preference

That list is not an order of preference, you know that right?

gravehold

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It wasn't because a couple were gay that they weren't eligible for adoption btw. Heterosexual cohabiting couples were also prohibited from applying jointly to adopt a child (my friend who is cohabiting with her boyfriend for years, had to apply solely to adopt a child they had fostered. They could not apply as a couple).

The relevant section of the Children and Family Relationship Act 2015 you're looking for is this bit -




Source: asw.ie/attachments/Children_and_Family_Relationships_Bill_Explanatory_Memorandum_2015.pdf[/url]
,
The situation for unmarried couples under the terms of the Adoption Act 2010 are set out below -



Source: citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/cohabiting_couples/adoption_and_unmarried_couples.html[/url]

No want's a mother and father a married couple

Ave Sodalis

eviltwin wrote: »

That list is not an order of preference, you know that right?

It's been pointed out to her about 20 times at this stage...

Maximus Alexander

gravehold wrote: »

aai.gov.ie/index.php/domestic-adoption/faq-domestic-adoption.html


(a) a married couple living together; this is the only circumstance where the law permits the adoption of a child by more than one person;


(b) a married person alone; in this circumstance the spouse’s consent to adopt must be obtained unless they are living apart and are separated under (i) a court decree or (ii) deed of separation or (iii) the spouse has deserted the prospective adopter or (iv) conduct on the part of the spouse results in the prospective adopter with just cause leaving the spouse and living apart;


(c) the mother, father or relative of the child (relative meaning a grandparent, brother, sister, uncle or aunt of the child and /or the spouse of any such person, the relationship to the child being traced through the mother or the father);


(d) a widow or widower

Only way a gay can adopt in from there is as sibling and he cannot do it as a couple his his bf.

Married couples get preference

The premise of your post is out of date.

gravehold

eviltwin wrote: »

That list is not an order of preference, you know that right?

Where can the gay couple adopt