A Civil Union? Yeah Right!

In case you’d missed it via Twitter or Facebook, my mammies got a civil partnership over in New Zealand on Monday the 4th January. It was a wonderful ceremony, with speeches from a brother, a sister in law, a mother and close friends. We had lots of our nearest and dearest there and would like to thank everyone who came along. So, this brief post is to post people to the photos that I have taken of the day (and the night or two before it). The set is available on Flickr (for free viewing, obviously), here. I’ll create a group at some point, for all of the photos of the event. Have a look, make comments and ask for more photos. These are the better ones (In my opinion anyway) but there are another 200+. Anyway, enjoy and take care everyone.

 

The EU’s ‘Culture of Death’ and more

As reported in yesterday’s Irish Times, a parish priest has denied claims that he spread a “vote no to Lisbon” leaflet (although he doesn’t deny that he wrote and signed it). The leaflet claimed that the EU has:

“embraced the ‘Culture of Death’. Yet again, Europe has become a slaughterhouse. Millions of its own children have been slaughtered”

This is in spite of the fact that only 17 out of 25 members of the European Union have access to safe and legal abortion on request (data accurate to 2007 – pdf). As an aside, far more have access to abortion to save the life of the mother (all except Malta); Ireland’s laws prohibit abortion except in the case of risk of death to the mother. Not, however, in the case of rape, incest, preservation of physical or mental health, fetal impairment or economic or social reasons.

The real gem, however, is the quote at the end of the article, from Cardinal Tarcision Bertone, the Vatican’s secretary of state.

“If Europe recognised homosexual couples as equal to marriage, for example, it would go against its own history. And it would be right to stand against it. The Church wants to encourage states in this.”

The age-old argument of “we’ve always done it this way, why should we change?” emerges. Never mind that polygamy was also the status quo at one point, the institution that tried to cover up systematic child sex abuse, that instigates the oppression of women’s rights and that caused the death of hundreds of thousands of people in the Crusades also want you to live in a static age; one that never progresses or advances. The Vatican, apparently, feels the need to retain control over who you love, who you have sex with, who you marry, what contraception you use, what you do in the case of that contraception failing, what you do when you’re raped, whether you want to go through the trauma of a still-birth (in the full knowledge that this will occur). I think I would be more appalled if there weren’t people like CountMeOut.ie in this country, providing people with information on leaving the Catholic Church.

Ok, rant over.

On a separate note:

The UCD Secular Humanist Society is holding an event tomorrow evening in the Blue Room of the Student Centre. Michael Nugent, the chair of Atheist Ireland, will be speaking on the topic ‘Blasphemy is a Human Right’. All members are invited (if you’re not a member you can sign up there and then, for a mere €2). The event starts at 6pm. This is sure to be a great talk; I’ve heard Michael on the radio before and he’s got some great ideas. E-mail ucdhumanistsociety@gmail.com for more information, or follow them on Twitter.

Happy Wednesday

– Conor

 

I’d like to blog…

… but I’m quite busy at university. I’m going to blog interesting stuff about my research project once it properly gets under way but for now here’s a notice of two events:

• GLEN are holding an information session on the Civil Partnership Bill this Wednesday (7th October) in the Westbury Hotel (Grafton St.) at 8pm. As they say:

The aim of these events is to inform people about what is in the Civil Partnership Bill and to discuss what it will mean practically for lesbian and gay couples. Dr Fergus Ryan, Head of DIT’s Law Department, will provide a detailed account of the Civil Partnership Bill.

Contact them for more details: http://www.glen.ie/

• MarriagEquality are also holding a workshop for adult children (18 years old +) of same-sex couples, to “share their experiences and opinions on growing up with LGBT parents” on November 21st. I’ll be there and if anyone else wants to be, call Dawn on 01 6599 459 or email dawn@marriagequality.ie. For more information see this page.

I’ll be back again more regularly soon.

– Conor

 

Letter in today’s Irish Times

In a letter in today’s Irish Times (Amnesty and Civil Partnership) that follows up on Amnesty’s support of full gay and lesbian marriage as the only equality and John Waters‘ response denying that there is a human right to marry, Pauline Welby points out that in Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights it is accepted that

Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution . . . The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State

Well spotted Pauline! While I’m sure some people will try to twist it and insist that this right is only for men to marry women and women to marry men, any sound interpretation would conclude that this is for men and women to marry either a man or a woman.

Now, isn’t that good news for a bank holiday Monday?

 

Sons and Daughters

Well, last week was a lot of fun. I had 1001 hits on the website and got my (heavily edited) letter in the Sunday Times, as well appearing on Matt Cooper‘s show on Thursday with Brenda Power (audio here – mp3, 5.3mb). I read Brenda’s second opinion piece and don’t think I’ll comment on it further than what I’ve already Tweeted – It’s an opinion piece that is not based in fact and she appears to have some sort of obsession with the idea that marriage is purely for reproductive purposes. As I said:

“To have and to hold, is sickness and in health, til you die from exhaustion having given birth to 8 children.”

The past week and Damien’s post got me thinking – we need a louder voice of children of LGBT couples in Ireland. So, here we go. If you are the son or daughter of a LGBT couple and would like to maybe do a joint blog, with the chance of radio, TV, newspaper, blog interviews (depending on how comfortable you would be with them) please e-mail conorpendergrast@gmail.com, or add me on Twitter and DM me. Or sure just leave a comment here 🙂

Inevitably there’ll be cases after the Civil Partnership Bill is brought in that highlight the massive problems with neglecting children in legislation. This’ll be our chance to stand up for our own rights and demonstrate how lesbian and gay parents are equally capable of raising well-adjusted and emotionally and socially stable individuals. Here’s the American Psychological Association’s policy on sexual orientation and parenting (And no Brenda, it’s not a single study. You can find similar policies but children’s groups across the US, but because of the relative rarity of cases in Ireland and even the UK, there are fewer studies here).

 

Yesterday, Thanks and This Evening

Hello all,

Just a quick post to mention two things.

Firstly, thank you to everyone who posted a comment, passed on this blog or read it yesterday. It was the busiest my blog has ever been, with 278 views, and I feel honoured to have that level of attention. Thanks specifically to Gaelick, Damien and Angry Potato for the links. I’m sorry I haven’t been blogging as much recently, I didn’t really feel the twinge of desire to express myself until I read that article.

Secondly, I’ll be on Matt Cooper’s The Last Word this evening at about 6pm, talking to him and Brenda Power. Should be good fun, so feel free to listen in and text in comments. It’d be nice to get some support.

 

Open Letter to Brenda Power

Dear Brenda,

I read with a heavy heart your article in the Sunday Times on 5th July and felt it necessary to respond in order to dispel the notions that you used to form your argument against allowing same-sex couples to be considered to adopt children in this state. Your concern for the rights of children in Ireland is admirable, but your arguments, ironically, serve only to stigmatise children of same-sex partners. As the sons of a lesbian couple who have been together for nearly thirty years, my brother and I are more than aware of one of the criteria in particular you specify in the adoption process; “the likelihood of social acceptance of the child”. My parents are not (yet) in a legally recognised relationship. According to the law, I am no more than a stranger to my non-biological mother, Bernadette.

Not allowing gay couples to be considered as adoptive parents and not recognising their relationships as marriage is not only inequality, it’s social stigmatisation. You are essentially stating: “You’re relationship is not as valid as a heterosexual relationship. You are of less value to society. You’re family and children ought to be treated differently.” This, in effect, teaches us that children of same-sex partners are not socially acceptable. The irony, you must see, is that by denying these couples the right to be considered to adopt because their children might not be accepted socially, you are deciding by default that children of same-sex couples should not be accepted socially.

Yours sincerely,

Conor Pendergrast

[I also sent this to the editor of the Sunday Times. If anyone has an e-mail address for Brenda, I’d appreciate if you could comment and let me know what it is. The article itself can be found here, with Panti’s response here.]

 

More on the Anti-Gay Marriage Campaign

Just a quick post to share two things. First up, Stephen Colbert’s support for the anti-gay marriage campaign that’s been running in the US. Oh Stephen, this is a step too far, even for you and your bigoted ways!

The Colbert Report	Mon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Colbert Coalition’s Anti-Gay Marriage Ad
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor NASA Name Contest

 

Second, I like this quote from Noam Chomsky:

“…if you ask me whether or not I’m an atheist, I wouldn’t even answer. I would first want an explanation of what it is that I’m supposed not to believe in, and I’ve never seen an explanation.”

Taken from ‘The Fifty Most Brilliant Atheists of All Time’.

 

“Why Marriage Matters”

Without writing too much of an essay, I’d like to discuss a document I found by a group against extending the right of marriage to same-sex couples. I’ve decided not to link to it, to avoid giving them more air-time essentially. The document can be found here (pdf, 472kb). Obviously, you’ll find them fairly easily if you want to.

The first page of this document is essentially a “marriage is good and this is why”. According to this, marriage reduces the risk of poverty, protects mental and physical health and married people live longer and happier lives. 

So, why not extend this advantage to gay people? If these are the benefits to society (happier, healthier people; less risk of poverty; protection of mental and physical health) then surely we should avail of this for all members of society, not just straight people.

For those that argue that this might not stand true for same-sex families, let’s look at some evidence from the American Psychological Association  (as opposed to from a research body that acts as a front for conservative groups).

research indicates that, despite the somewhat hostile social climate within which same-sex relationships develop, many lesbians and gay men have formed durable relationships

Interesting eh? And how about:

Researchers… have also speculated that the stability of same-sex couples would be enhanced if partners from same-sex couples enjoyed the same levels of social support and public recognition of their relationships as partners from heterosexual couples do.

And finally:

research has found that the factors that predict relationship satisfaction, relationship commitment, and relationship stability are remarkably similar for both same-sex cohabiting couples and heterosexual married couples

For more information on this, take a look at their policy resolution (pdf, 194kb).

So now I turn to the second page, which includes the gem:

“Here are answers to help you defend the family”

From what? Please, tell me what I need to defend my family against? I think this point is often overlooked: We’re not talking about banning families. We’re not talking about abolishing heterosexual marriage. We’re talking about extending the opportunity and the option of marriage to more people.

 

“But this is what every same-sex home does — and for no other reason but to satisfy adult desire.”

That’s rubbish, utter rubbish. My own “same-sex home” was started with the intent of raising a family in a loving atmosphere. Saying that a home is started to “satisfy adult desire” makes it sound like a brothel, as opposed to the truth; that my family and that of other same-sex families are rarely different to opposite-sex families in terms of the love shared and the reasons they were started. 

“Marriage is about bringing male and female together, so that children have mothers and fathers, and so that women aren’t stuck with the enormous, unfair burdens of parenting alone— and that is good.”

In a same-sex relationship, the couple tend to distribute household tasks in a more equal way, as opposed to in heterosexual relationships, whereby the male and female tend to conform to their gender stereotypes. Marriage isn’t about bringing male and female together, it’s about joining two individuals in a committed and long-term relationship.

“Once you rip a ship off its mooring who knows where it will drift next?”

This kind of disgraceful scare-mongering is what is fuelling the anti-gay marriage movement. I can already hear someone scream “Won’t someone please think of the children?”. I am not looking for polygamy, I am not looking for marriage for brothers and sisters, I’m not looking for people to be able to marry their horses. The analogy used here implies that enabling  more members of society to marry their loved ones will lead to a breakdown in society’s family values and seems to be spoken of in the same tones as the apocolypse.  I’ll put this as clearly as possible: I want my parents to have the option to mark their relationship (24 years going this year) in a socially and legally recognised manner. This will not degrade anyone else’s relationship or marriage. If anything, it will strengthen the position that marriage will have, by ensuring that it is an institution open to all members of society, regardless of sexuality.

Legal scholars warn that the tax exempt status and accreditation of Catholic organizations could be at risk.

Sorry for needing to ask, but why exactly should Catholic organisations get tax exempt status? The Catholic Church has an unestimatable worth, hidden from view with loopholes and veils of secrecy. Check out this more a little more information (but very little to be honest). If anyone can shed some light on the financial goings-on of this Vatican-based powerhouse I would be very grateful.

But I digress. Why should any institution that teaches that people are not equal, that some people are evil by default, that reason and logic should be condemned at all opportunities and that their ideas are the only ideas that should be accepted ever be given funding and tax breaks by a state? Religion is ultimately harmful, as suggested by Voltaire:

Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities

Anyway, there’s plenty more there for people to look at and discuss. Feel free to leave a comment (especially if you disagree, I like a good chat 🙂 ) and keep the debate going about this.

 

Ubiquitous Election Post, David Quinn and other stuff from Ireland

It was a busy and very exciting week, as we all know, with the US Presidential Elections happening on Tuesday night. I was glued to the TV (until 4am, when I became cold and sober, at which point I went home) and pretty excited to see Obama winning. While we can never be sure what a politician will actually do, he does state support for “full civil unions and federal rights for LGBT couples” and expanding adoption rights to give people fair consideration as parents, regardless of sexual orientation (see this pdf).

But of course, this silver lining came with a cloud for many Americans, with Arizona, California and Florida banning gay marriage (even though California and Floria both voted for Obama) and Arkansas banning gay couples from adopting children. Pretty bleak stuff, but sure the rights groups will be challenging the ban. Ironically, some have suggested that the increase in black people voting this year might have lead to the passing of the ban.

Back to Ireland, and the Catholic Church is again getting angsty about the Civil Partnership Bill.

“…Ireland looks set to repeat the mistakes of societies like Britain and the US by introducing legislation which will promote cohabitation, remove most incentives to marry and grant same-sex couples the same rights as marriage in all but adoption.”

Ah, if only he knew that if I was writing the legislation I would add in proper legislation to recognise families of same-sex couples. Ah well, at least earlier fears the government sidelining the Civil Partnership Bill due to the economic turmoil (of course, there is no recession) have been squashed.

And, following in the footsteps of Cardinal Brady threatening legal action when the Civil Partnership Bill is introduced, the ever-pleasant David Quinn has written another opinion piece, stating that he believes that the Government is launching a “direct attack on the special status of marriage”.

This got me thinking, why is it that opponents focus on the “institution” of marriage so frequently? An idea came to me today. Maybe the Catholic Church (in Ireland) has been feeling its grasp on Irish people slipping away gradually since the foundation of the State. Could it be that marriage is the final hold it has over society, and it will do anything in its power to keep from losing that power?

Or maybe it’s just that they don’t want marriage demeaned by giving it to the gays. Ouch.

PS: David, you erred in saying that there was a “lack of any real public demand” for civil partnership. To quote Moninne Griffith of MarriagEquality:

“It is high time that the lesbian and gay family unit, including children, are recognised and protected in Ireland. Indeed, 84% of the Irish population support civil partnership or civil marriage being made available to lesbians and gay men and an overwhelming 86% agree that children of gay and lesbian parents should have the same family rights as the children of married parents.”