Monocle
Member
That fabulous oven mitt literally says no, but aesthetically it says hell yes. Work that fierce kitchen apparel, Gramps!The oven gloves are out, shit is getting serious...
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ireland has first-in-world national referendum on gay marriage [Update: Yes Wins]
- Thread starter ivysaur12
- Start date
- Status
Shake Appeal
Member
The Constitution of Ireland can only be amended by referendum. This is by design. There are pros and cons to this; not least among the pros is greater democratic representation than under the American system.
While I agree that minority rights should be protected independent of the whims of the electorate, marriage is not usually construed as a "human right" (in Ireland; it is considered a human right under the UDHR, which Americans don't care about). It's a civil right extended by the state, and it is largely appropriate in this context that the state call for a referendum to declare whom it can be extended to.
Could they have done this without amending the constitution? Yes. But that would have made it weaker and more open to revision.
It is inclusive, but it's kind of offensive.
John Kowalski
Banned
I never understood why matters of unalienable human rights must go through national referendums. They only highlight the worst parts of the democratic process.
Ireland is a unique case because any changing to the wording of the constitution needs to be approved via a referendum
That needs to change.
Shake Appeal
Member
Marriage has only recently been considered a "human right" in some quarters, and it is not a human right according to the European Court of Human Rights. The U.S. Supreme Court also declined to call it a human right, which is why we're going through a tortured state-by-state process right now.
They're sh-tting it, because if this passes, it would put paid to the narrative that's apparently common (and persuasive?) in these debates across other parts of Europe that this is something being forced in by a liberal elite against popular opinion.
Ditto, I imagine, it would be a rebuke to that kind of messaging anywhere else in the world or in the US.
It would be a very significant mark on the road globally. I really hope Ireland can do this for its own people, but making history in the process would be nice.
A Fish Aficionado
I am going to make it through this year if it kills me
Go saoirse
No it doesnt
If things like this are put up to popular vote then yeah it does.
Shake Appeal
Member
Yes, I think we should immediately replace it with the U.S.'s perfectly calibrated and not at all sclerotic "representative" system of "checks and balances" and interminable federal-state contortions. Because that has proved so much more effective at speedily and democratically confirming rights of its citizens, both historically and in the present moment.
N
NinjaFridge
Unconfirmed Member
Maybe for things like this which fall under human rights it should be changed, but for everything else there is no reason to change it.
maquiladora
Member
Not really. I think it's far better that changes made to constitutions are determined by the people directly and not based on the policies of whatever corporate bankrolled political party happens to be in power at the time.
In the modern era, in a progressive country, important equal rights issues like this have no danger of failing to pass. So there is nothing to worry about here.
John Kowalski
Banned
I would frame it under equality myself, tbh. Personally it's not so much a matter of providing the right to marry as it is eliminating the discriminatory practice of restricting who can marry and who can't.
Depends on the minority. There's still some that would fail in so called "progressive" countries.
Shake Appeal
Member
To be clear, I think marriage probably should be a human right because of how strongly constructed it is in just about every society. This isn't quite as good to my mind as completely dissolving it as an institution and making "civil partnership" the basic and easily revocable unit of the state, but whatever, I'll take it.
But people who are saying "Why are they voting on a human right?" are flatly ignoring the fact that it is not currently considered a human right, legally speaking, either in Ireland or the European Union. Or, for that matter, in the sainted United States of America.
Spaced Harrier
Member
Agreed with both points above its disigenious and obnoxious tbh.
queen
Spaced Harrier
Member
No it doesnt. It's far easier to change the irish constitution than the american one. Some people need to read up on it before they posy stuff. Marriage equality could have been delivered by legislation but that could also be repealed by a future parliament. Enshrining it in the constitution makes it harder to change and also means any laws passed cannot goes against marriage equality. incidently most countries with marriage equality needed elected governments to bring it in which were elected by popular vote
FortuneFaded
Member
Why is she holding a sign saying when she's going to vote?
N
NinjaFridge
Unconfirmed Member
Well she is taller than the Irish president.
It's something we value as an independent nation even if the referendums are sometimes about the most bleeding obvious choice.
DoctorFling
Member
I really regret not being registered to vote, I completely forgot with exams and projects. Shitty excuse, but I'm a pretty shit person. :/
Shake Appeal
Member
Also incidentally, the holy scripture that is the Bill of Rights was cobbled together by a bunch of bickering, self-appointed slaveowners at the end of the 18th century and could probably use some revising.
The Irish people have gone to the polls to vote on an amendment to their constitution 35 times since 1937. By contrast, there have been just 27 amendments to the U.S. Constitution in over two centuries. But I guess it was near-perfect the first time. Or at least three-fifths perfect, right?
But by all means, America, please continue lecturing us about how our dysfunctional political system needs to change to be more like yours. Lord knows it has served minorities so well over the years!
It doesn't need to change and it isn't going to change.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
That is wishful thinking. There are many regressive things that would win majority vote in progressive countries. Death penalty for example would still pass in most of Europe were there a referendum.
Matarese171
Member
Could be worse mate. I'm registered but forgot to change my address. Its true I don't need a polling card but there is no way I can get to my 'local' polling station today.
Heres hoping the yes vote passes despite my lapse
Shake Appeal
Member
The Irish people abolished the death penalty by, get this, popular vote.
And then we voted again in 2001 to prohibit it ever being reintroduced.
On the other hand, we also failed to give women safe, legal access to abortions by popular vote, which is a serious black mark on the country as far as I'm concerned.
John Kowalski
Banned
You are correct.
Agree with all you say, but the other reason we're voting is simply because we have to. It's the only way to grant these rights to all the citizens of the state.
The system works for this unbelievably tiny country.
Shake Appeal
Member
Oh, I'd vote Yes in a heartbeat if I were allowed to (I'm an emigrant). And there's also the argument that passing it by popular vote gives it more emotional force and moral legitimacy.
I really don't think it matters in the long run. It's an especially dangerous tactic when it acts as an excuse for elected officials and judges to shirk their duties (see: the 6th Circuit ruling in US, which used the argument that passing by popular vote or through the democratic process was the more noble path as a reason to uphold those states' gay marriage bans)
Also, there's a history of case law in America (since you mentioned this before) about how marriage is a "fundamental right". That just hasn't been extended to gay couples yet, but will next month, so sort of moot.
She tweeted a relatively long rallying message yesterday:
I think she's used Twitter more in the past month than she has in all of the preceding time combined.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
My point being that just because a country is progressive doesn't mean it won't hold any regressive views. Thinking that only progressive things get passed is wishful thinking. This is one thread where a referendum is doing good work; but imagine it were 2005 instead of 2015 and this referendum was taking place? Referendums and elections don't always go the way you want them to go.
Problem with the US is their hyperpartisan way of selecting judges and court justices. At the state level they have popular elections for judges (WTF?) and then at the federal level, the partisan president appoints a partisan judge. Canada makes decisions the same way the US does, but the courts are very apolitical, Supreme Court judges have to be recommended by lower courts and provincial Attorney Generals, and we were the third jurisdiction to legalize gay marriage after the Netherlands and Belgium.
Ireland is the third last Western country to legalize gay marriage, so this referendum system isn't actually speaking too well for the referendum system. But I believe most of Europe legalized same-sex marriage indirectly through popular vote one way or another.
Yes, and the alternative would fail in other countries. Look at the United States. More than 50% of the population wants gay marriage. Look at the politicians doing their best to stop that because it is the courts taking down the bans, not the politicians approving gay marriage. So of the four last countries, one has to have to courts decide it and one lets the population do it.
I don't think any of them would actually believe marriage is mandatory.
Yeah, but pressure from spouse etc.
Don't you know that if gay marriage passes anywhere, everyone everywhere will be forced to marry gay.
Enter The 36 Chambers
Member
Thankfully you're not Irish so we will continue to have a say in any change to our constitution.
My mate is flying in from Germany just to vote. Inspired me to make the 6 hour drive to vote yes. On my way to Dublin as we speak
Shake Appeal
Member
Two things here. First, this highlights the repeated failure of your alternative system to actually secure the rights it supposedly guarantees. Second, it will probably be extended next month in accordance with the whims of nine black-cowled augurs who are deeply polarized and appointed for life in accordance with the whims of the not particularly democratically elected President. Meanwhile, the entrails those augurs will be mulling over were laid out 200 years ago by imperfect men (and only men, and only white men, and only rich white men) in accordance with the wishes of a rich white elite who didn't want to pay taxes. This is still "putting it to a popular vote," just in an extremely diffuse, historically distant, and downright wacky way.
Neither of our systems has proved an ideal way of securing minority rights, and probably no system will until we find those rights inscribed in the atoms of the universe, which we will likely not.
I am absolutely on board with the idea that we shouldn't put minority rights to popular vote. I think that's an important principle. I just also think Americans are liable to throw stones in glass houses when it comes to how effectively or efficiently their respective political system has extended and protected minority rights.
Seems like a stupid reason to deny the right to others though.
How long until the polls close, by the way?
Shake Appeal
Member
Homosexuality was only decriminalized in Ireland in 1993. To get to a likely positive majority on same-sex marriage by 2015 represents astonishingly speedy progress for a country that was once and still is, to some degree, in thrall to the Roman Catholic Church.
Three hours.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked