100%..born in one too, really annoys me seeing people here use it constantly to justify their arguments. Who I'm betting were not born in one and were not even alive in those times.
What ACTUAL discriminations are currently being applied as a result of the existing constitutions that won't be applied afterwards?
I don't see any rationale in changing to the new wording when there are so many unknowns about it.
The key word in that comment is "simple". Did you know that it's also a synonym for gullible?
Ah, the Mother and Baby homes (I'm a "survivor" of one, incidentally) - the last resort of the desperate debater!
Playing the "mother and baby homes" card is almost as contemptible as the Netanyahu Hate Gang playing the Holocaust card to justify their antics in Gaza.
I hope that you have managed to repair your dropped jaw, incidentally, as slack jaws are a very serious problem in my part of the country.
Catholic Ireland are the ones who wrote the original Consitution. Plenty of people on this thread are desperately pushing for that Catholic driven Constitution not to he amended either.
That's gas, I'd see the opposite, I see nothing at all to favour a no vote only what aboutery and veiled Iona institute style dogma.
A yes vote is (edit) for equality and removing another layer of discrimination.
Same influences as on the constitution.
That was more Catholic Ireland driving that nonsense
The more I see from the Yes side, the more I’m inclined to vote No.
Seeing the pros and cons being teased out on here, there seems to be very little to the Yes side
My jaw dropped at this one...
In nearly eighty years since the constitution was first written the support for single parent families has never been in doubts
Yes, the support provided by those Mother and baby homes was really never in doubt alright.
First a single parent are recognised as a family both in common law and tge constitution make no reference to discrimination against them.
It recognises marriage as the ideal basis of family and wants to support that. In nearly eighty years since the constitution was first written the support for single parent families has never been in doubts in the state and is now stronger than it ever was.
Durable relationship is in relationships between couples but its meaning may recognise trouples or polygamous relationships. It not about single parent families where common law recognises the bond between a parent either mother or father and their children whether in a marriage or not. The constitution could never override that even if it tried.
They are not recognised constitutionally as a family
A solicitors take on the referendum.
Not going to happen, no one is going to erode the rights of single parents and their children. On the other hand there is guaranteed to be multiple issues with non married couples gaining rights that should only be bestowed up those entering an actual legal tie to each other (i.e. marriage).
I can give a valid reason, you just don't think it's a valid reason. I'm sure there are plenty of single parents and their children who do consider being reconsidered as a family in the Constitution as being important and worthwhile.
I can’t state why the wouldn’t want to. Same as you can’t give a valid reason the change for it other than a protection against some highly unlikely and fictitious erorsion of rights.
And if neither side has a convincing argument I would like it as is as they are likely plenty of unforeseen negative consequences rather than unseen positives.
Protection when it comes to the potential for future legislation eroding their rights. You've also failed to state why single parents and their child(ren) would not want to be considered a family under the Constitution.
I was listening to Lunchtime Live on Newstalk and Andrea had a research professor from Trinity college on giving a well balanced explanation of the proposed changes. He was very careful not to promote either a yes or no vote. After listening to him I have decided to vote no on both amendments. Attached link to the segment - it's worth listening too.
Disregard that initial part of my post. You are still avoiding my question.
What advantage do they gain? Protection from what exactly? I really don’t see what’s in it from them (currently at least).
I see FG MEPS have voted against their own European party and against Irish farmers.
You would want to be totally ffucked in the head to trust or vote for any referendum that this government supports.
I was listening to FF,FG councillors on local radio trying to defend a local bypass only getting 300000. A local walk way got four million and they sent 800 million to Northern Ireland. I don't know what is wrong. I'm personally very worried about this country. The squandaring that is going on will definitely have to be paid for
It basically is what you said with your virtue signalling comment, stop pretending otherwise. It provides them constitutional protection.
No doubt there's a long diverse list of woman you know and have spoken to the subject. Still, I'm there might be the odd woman outside of that pool who will actually be interested enough and will vote on it.
There's an irony in recognising single parents and their children as a family is removing mother from the constitution given that most single parents l know are mothers.
Even most 2 parent families I know the mothers probably do more. There's probably an over inflated opinion of how much men do. While more than a generation ago on average at a national level I think it's unlikely they do 50%+ of the caring.
But single parent and child are recognised as a family by society, who cares what the gov think or what they want us to think. From what I've read and heard, there is no meaninfull advantage to be got from this referendum. If they want to show support for them and their contribution to society then they can do it through income support or tax allowances or something. No woman I've spoken to gives 2 Fs about the constitution, it's wording or its meaning.
That’s not what I said.
I asked the question what additional benefit would they see from being recognised that they don’t currently have?
If you don't think a single parent and their child should recognised as a family that's your choice to make. The joys of democracy as they say.
The phrase with"endeavour" is the wording of the existing legislation as quoted, its is to be replaced with Article 42b which states that
“The State recognises that the provision of care, by members of a family to one another by reason of the bonds that exist among them, gives to Society a support without which the common good cannot be achieved, and shall strive to support such provision.”
So strive vs endeavor, fur and hair.
"Endeavor" hasn't been doing much heavy lifting all along.
I'm not sure many single persons would consider themselves and their child being viewed as a family as "damaging". Unless the term durable relationship is included in inheritance law then I don't see how that could be possible.
Why exactly would a court take any significance into an "alleged" legal msrraige? Also, the government already need to determine if a durable relationship exists for applications from non EU citizens to join their EU partner. This isn't new territory for them.
I am curious as to what benefit a single parent and child, “being recognised in the consitution as a family” will be able to reap from this change?
It sounds like virtue signalling.
I don’t see how these groups will benefit over the current situation. A parent - child relationship is already a very strong relationship both legally and in society, these rights are generally then given in cases where grandparents or similar are the guardian.
On the other hand I have very major issues with leaving the situation open for non-married couples with no legally recognised ties getting the rights of a married couple from a tax, inheritance etc perspective or otherwise. I am voting against this for this reason alone.
I would add I do not mean to offend unmarried couples but my view is if you want the rights and responsibilities then the option is there for anyone to sign the forms.
Think they are Citizen assembly recommendations
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/953388c7f864cc590f5d23536526159f.svg)
