Madam, – Breda O’Brien (Opinion, February 6th) is worried about registrars having to conduct a civil partnership ceremony when the civil partnerships are against their religious beliefs.
But registrars are obliged to conduct civil marriages between Catholics even if their religious beliefs tell them that the marriage should be taking place in church. They are obliged to conduct civil marriages between divorced people even if their religious beliefs tell them divorce is wrong. They are obliged to conduct civil marriages between people whose marriages have been annulled by the civil courts for reasons that the Church might not accept.
It is not the job of a registrar to approve a marriage, or a civil partnership, but merely to make certain checks, pronounce certain phrases and make certain records to satisfy requirements laid down by law. – Yours, etc,
A chara, – Breda O’Brien writes that “how we handle gay rights versus religious rights will determine whether we become a polarised society that is a cold house for religion, or a genuinely tolerant society”.
Implicit in this comparison is a faulty assumption these rights fall under equivalent categories. Ms O’Brien might plausibly contrast religious views of society against secular views, both being deeply held outlooks.
However, the same cannot be said of gay rights, which are a recognition of an innate characteristic. In classical liberal terms, the rights afforded to religion are derived from freedom of speech and association, and in a pluralist society we should naturally be respectful of differences in such matters, whereas the rights recognised for gay people are a matter of equality before the law, which surely ranks higher in any estimation of rights. – Is mise,
Madam, Thank you for providing us with a clear elucidation of certain aspects of tolerance in society (Breda O’Brien, Opinion, February 6th). It might be useful if members of the Oireachtas were to read and ponder some of the ideas set out by your columnist before finally signing off on the civil partnerships legislation, lest we, albeit unwittingly, seriously damage the development of the tender plant that is tolerance, diversity and equality in our society. Ms O’Brien instances how this is currently happening to our nearest neighbour.
Who would have believed that, as Archbishop Dr John Sentamu has said, “diversity” could ever come to mean every colour and creed except Christianity, and “equality” come to exclude anyone with a Christian belief in God? There is no need to remind ourselves that “religious freedom” encompasses the freedom to believe and practise one’s belief (as well as the freedom not to believe). This truth will undoubtedly resonate widely among our people, as will the practical suggestion that “a registrar should only be allowed a derogation from a civil partnership registration if a substitute is available”. What is the point in having a partnership registered by an unwilling person in violation of that person’s conscience? Is Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern and our Government listening? In the interest of good legislation, I sincerely hope so. – Yours, etc,