Comments on: Your Tax Euros at work

By: Dan Sullivan

Dan Sullivan — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 17:24:24 +0000

My apologies, as it was Senator Terry, I had thought it had been presented as a private members bill at some point. It was in the last 2 years wasn’t it? And I’m sure it was criticised by some/many, it was also supported by a great many. I don’t remember there being any polling on it, so to suggest that there was a consensus of opposition or support to it would be stretching things.

I think the main issue it didn’t deal with was adoption. That is slightly different to saying ‘children being raised by lesbian and gay couples’. It’s not like there is currently any issue with children of their biological parents being raised by them, the issue is where there is no biological connection.

In the hetero situation the partner is allowed to apply to adopt the child, which is currently not the case here as I understand it for the partner in a same sex relationship. Even in hetero sexual relationship adoption isn’t automatic. The next issue beyond that is adoption whereby neither of the people involved have any connection to the child. And the religious right will attempt to have a field day with that one. We’ll have Dana on the telly morn and noon and night.

By: Suzy Byrne

Suzy Byrne — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:26:27 +0000

Dan, FG have not presented legislation before the Seanad but they have published a policy on the matter of rights for co-habiting couples – it however refused to deal with the matter of the children being raised by lesbian and gay couples and was criticised by many in the lesbian and gay community at the time. Maybe like the health service we’ll see a joint FG/LAbour initiative on the matter before the election.

By: Dan Sullivan

Dan Sullivan — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:18:16 +0000

Hang on Simon, FG have presented legislation in the Seanad on recognition for same-sex partnerships or civil unions. It doesn’t quite go as far as marriage, but it was broadly similar to Senator Norris proposals as I recall. It’s a darn side more than FF or the PDs have presented.

By: simon

simon — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 08:22:05 +0000

I think WBS The Greens are in favour. PD’s and Labour want to allow them to register partnerships and get tax benefits. FF and FG seem to be

FG/FF “We Like gays”
People “But what about marriage”
FG/FF “we like gays”
people “but wha”
FG/FF “We like gays”

SF I am guessing like them if they are catholic

By: WorldbyStorm

WorldbyStorm — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 21:01:45 +0000

It is hard to understand why the state would bring forward these witnesses. Particularly since the evidence appears to be contrary to their position, i.e. same sex marriages have no detrimental effects upon children raised in them. However this sort of small c conservatism does typify aspects of the debate, and the general approach by the state. However, presumably this is because the government is terrified to push the issue any higher on the agenda in the run-up to an election…

I’m trying to recall what the respective policies of the opposition and other groups are on the issue.