Talk:Same-sex marriage in Ireland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Law Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
???	This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance assessment on the assessment scale.

	LGBT Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.

Why is this page up for deletion and where can I go to argue against it? Spinboy 22:47, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'd suggest merging it with something else. Anglachel 23:25, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

I wouldn't. It's detailed enough to stand on its own, and plenty of countries and subnational entities already have their own [[Same-sex marriage in foo]] articles. -Montréalais 20:15, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Someone told me that Gilligan and Zapaone had lived in Dublin as a couple for years. If true, then the word "relocated" should probably be "returned". Evertype 11:27, 2004 Dec 8 (UTC)

[edit] Propose redirecting to Civil unions in Ireland

I think this article should be redirected for the following reasons

1. There has been no specific debate on same-sex marriage in Ireland. There has been general debate on the issues surrounding gay relationships. The outcome of the debate is much more likely to be some form of civil union, falling short of marriage. Therefore the debate is best covered in the article on Civil Unions
2. This article is incomplete - it refers on only one element of the debate, the Gilligan/Zappone case and a very incomplete reference to the constitutional review. The external links are missing some more relevant articles. To make the article complete would require including much of the material which I have already added to the Civil Unions article. There would then be duplication. Redirects are a better way to handle that issue.
3. For other countries which have had and resolved the debate on recognition of gay relationships by adopting civil parternships, such as UK, the articles on Same-sex marriage are redirected to civil unions
4. The inclusion of Ireland in a list of articles on Same sex marriage which begins with Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, USA, given that SSM is not being debated and is very unlikely to arise, means that for consistency, all other countries which are more advanced in their treatment of gay relationships should also be included - such as Denmark, Portugal, UK, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Hungary, Czech Republic etc.
5. Others in the past have also proposed the removal of this page. The only argument made in favour of it's retention was that it is detailed enough - not true - and that the same policy is followed for other countries - not true. The conclusion that the article is detailed enough was made by Montrelais - who is Canadian and thus probably not as familiar with the situation in Ireland as an Irish person, such as I
6. The only other person currently in favour of retaining this article - Spinboy - is also based in Canada, and again, not as familiar with the situation as I.

I strongly feel that this article should be redirected. If there are signficant points made here against doing so, then I will invite debate among the Irish WP community, and possibly request a vote. If there are no convincing rebuttals of the points above I will revert to my redirects in a week or so. -Rye1967 23:57, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)

I disagree with re-directing it.

Sources: * Irish Examiner

• Taipei Times
• Irish Examiner Editorial--Spinboy 00:10, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please comment on my points above or support your position with your own arguments. Your only argument for retention is the citing of links from the article itself. Those links are not evidence any substantial debate in Ireland on same-sex marriage as distinct from civil unions :-

• The first link is broken
• The second link is a report on the first day of the Gilligan/Zappone recognition case. It is not evidence of a debate on provision of same-sex marriage in Ireland. In the unlikely scenario that the case is won and the court directs that the state could/should recognise out-of-state same-sex marriages for tax purposes, the only possible possible positive result for Irish gay couples in the current 'climate' would be a form of civil unions. Taoiseach Ahern stated Nov 04 that gay marriage 'is a long way off' and I believe that even a majority of the Irish gay community would agree.
• The third link is a commentary on remarks by Justice Minister McDowell that a significant extension of tax breaks would have colossal consquences for married couples. The gay-marriage headline is misleading since the minister is not reported as specifically referring to gay marriage as opposed to any other form of partnership. Even if he was, he was debating a red-herring with himself, since no-one else is raising the issue. His remarks could also be considered speculative, inaccurate, outside of his domain, and a trial balloon, and therefore not worthy of an encyclopedia.

-Rye1967 04:05, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

I live in Ireland and can inform you that "marriage" is in fact being discussed. The Irish Council for Civil Liberties has made a position paper regarding full equality, which means marriage is on the table along with other configurations. So it is not the case that SSM is not being discussed. It is. Evertype 19:28, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)

Do you have any sources for that ICCL position paper? On their site - [1] I find their Dec 04 submission on the Law Reform Commission report on partnership rights. (http://www.iccl.ie/about/05_LawReformCommissionSubmissionPartnershipRights.pdf). It says that ICCL welcome the LRC proposals, that addressing inequalities in family law and legal recognition of partnership rights are ICCL strategic goals to 2009. It goes on to say that the LRC proposals do not go far enough and that civil registered unions are necesary. No mention of same-sex marriage.

- Rye1967 21:47, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

I have a copy of this document. I assume it has been submitted. I'm a bit busy at the moment, but I assure you, "marriage" is being discussed in Ireland. Many will take any rights over no rights but full equality means just what it says on the tin. I do not understand why you think this article should be deleted. People are discussing "The Family" and "marriage" as referred to in the Constitution, and that means that SSM is being discussed. Evertype 23:08, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)

I think that the contents of the ICCL website are stronger evidence than a document which you personally posess. Furthermore, on RTE Radio 1, Sun 20th March, Marie Mulholland, ICCL "Partnerships Officer", briefly discussed the issue. She said there were 2 possible approaches - seek SSM or something less. She agreed that offering 'full' marriage to gay couples would probably require a constitutional amendment, and said that such an amendement would be unlikely to pass and that therefore it is better to seek partnerships. So ICCL is not seeking full marriage for gays and my point still stands - there is no substantial public debate/discussion/campaign on specifically offering same-sex-marriage in Ireland right now, of a level that requires a page on this encyclopedia. There may be in the future, and I take no issue with your definition of full equality, but this debate is about the correct characterisation of the current debate in Ireland, not about what the outcome 'should' be. Equally, there is no substantial debate/discussion/campaign/legal moves on expressly limiting marriage to man/woman, but if there was it might be justifcation for an article (eg Same-sex marriage in Australia, Same-sex marriage in France) ... although it doesn't appear to have lead to articles on those 11+ USA States that have done just that.

Your proposition that there should be an article on SSM-Ireland because people are discussing family/marriage/the Constituation doesn't stand either. Those topics would be best covered in Constitution of Ireland, or in 'Marriage in Ireland'.

I have given 6 reasons above why the article should redirected and content deleted. Point 6 - Only 2 people in favour of retention - is now partially disproved. However in order to clarify, I will make my point in a different way.

What we are debating is the correct 'drawer' in this encyclopedia to contain the Irish gay partnerships debate, either 'Civil Unions' or 'Same-Sex marriage. It is unfortunate that each country has to be in one of the other drawer (only Ireland - and of recent days, South Africa - are in both), it would be better if the articles were entitied 'Gay Partnership Rights in XXX'. However the convention has been adopted and changing it now would be a substantial project.

Now, if a martian were to visit this planet, wanting to marry her martian girlfriend, and consulted this encyclopeida, she needs accurate info. If she were to look into the SSM drawer, she would find Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Spain, South Africa, USA (part) ... and Ireland. Despite wanting more visitors in Ireland, that would be misleading info for her. She has no hope of marrying her girlfriend in Ireland for a long long time and should go to one of the others, except Australia&France-moves against- and Romania - only a politcial campaign stmt in favour. If our martian friend is happy to accept a civil partnership then she could go to Ireland - but she would be best served to first read Civil Union and consider Germany, UK, NZ, etc. Of course we are not writing for martians, but humans like accurate coverage too.

- Rye1967 01:04, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)