RTÉ has to be neutral in covering referendum
WHY was I not surprised to hear Áine Lawlor interview that gentleman on his feelings on having his picture displayed on the No posters? (Of course the researchers located him.)
It was interesting that with all her probing she did not manage to get him to say ‘he was outraged!’
Every week we hear on the radio a personal story from some gay person, and how natural and happy their lives are.
This is RTÉ’s way of getting the Government’s agenda for the Yes side across with subtlety without actually promoting a Yes vote and an imbalance.
This is outrageous! The Irish people are being bullied and are afraid to say they intend voting ‘No’ for fear of being called homophobic.
Like me, most people do not have a problem with gays in our society... live and let live.
What we do have a problem with is with them expecting our Constitution to change.
When we have a former President and our Taoiseach telling us how we should vote, it is outrageous. CLARE McCORMICK, via email.
What is there to fear?
I CAN understand why some people might say that children are always better off with a mother and father.
However, as someone who grew up in a family with a violent, abusive father and a timid, terrified mother, I can assure them that I would far rather have had two loving parents of the same sex than the dysfunctional, unloving heterosexual parents I was given.
People from happy families might not appreciate that.
Nevertheless, I simply don’t understand why any of this is relevant to the marriage referendum.
Gay people have already been given the right to adopt children: this referendum will not change that.
All this referendum does is change the name of what we currently call ‘civil partnership’ to ‘marriage’. The Church will not be expected to marry gay people.
This referendum is simply about removing the sign from the register office door that effectively says: ‘Gay people not welcome’.
After all the years during which Irish people were treated as secondclass citizens by others, whether in the US, the UK or the North, you would hope that we have learned that we do not need to be afraid of treating others equally.
Irish families will continue to flourish; we will continue to have more babies than any other country in Europe; we will retain our ethos of family and community.
Meanwhile a few gay people will call their ‘civil partnership’ a ‘wed- ding’ – and feel that they are no longer being treated as second-class citizens just because of their sexuality. NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED.
Maybe is a fair answer
PHILIP Nolan’s brilliantly crafted article (08/05/2015) suggests superiority over mere mortals in the context of the same sex marriage referendum and 17 words.
His clever analysis and often pedantic posturing ignores the fact that the answer to the 17-word referendum question could be ‘Maybe’.
That would be a perfectly fair answer showing doubt and uncertainty but which would invalidate the referendum paper if entered on voting paper.
Believe it or not, Mr Nolan, life is chock-a-block with equivocation, uncertainty and indecision.
I do see issues as right and wrong and white and black without equivocation but I am in a minority.
This referendum will be ignored by many out of disinterest; others from sheer apathy and quite a number from that ‘sitting on the fence’ brigade who can just never answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to anything. JOHN P KELLY, Clontarf, Dublin.
Why I am voting No
WHILST the Children and Family Relationships Act, passed only last month, has rendered it legally permissible for two people of the same sex to adopt; if the same sex marriage referendum is passed later this month it will, in addition, be constitutionally impermissible to prefer as adoptive parents a husband and wife (on the grounds that to do so would offer a child both a f ather and mother) over two married people of the same sex.
A child may be at the loss of a father or a mother through unfortunate circumstances, but, as a practising solicitor, I find it monstrous that any child would be deliberately deprived of either a father or a mother by legal design.
In reaction to this objection, many of those promoting this referendum claim there is no identifiable benefit to a child in having both a father and a mother, as opposed to two parents of the same sex.
This is to say to me that I never had, have not now, and never will have, as father, anything to offer my three children, and that my wife, as their mother, never had, has not now, and never will have, anything to offer them.
I find that claim arrogant, offensive, and demeaning.
In that being a father is so much bound up with being a man, and, in the case of my wife, being a mother is so much bound up with being a woman, I also find it dehumanising.
For these, and several other reasons, I will be voting No on May 22.
I hope every mother and father who feels similarly offended does likewise. . CATHAL QUINN,
Solicitor, Glen Villa, New Mills, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal.
Permanent water protest
THE Government has to go to the people within 12 months. Fact. This is the time available to defeat the water charges finally.
These charges are the brainchild of our own Government. Europe did not dictate their introduction.
Monthly marches are not achieving a result. There needs to be permanent protest by setting up people’s camps at the entrances to the Dáil.
Man them on a shift basis 24 hours a day. There needs to be up to 500 people there at any time.
There are enough retired, unemployed and shift workers available to do this. The so- called middle class needs to get involved.
This would seriously impact on the day-to- day workings of the Government.
JOE DIXON, Ratoath, Co. Meath.