Sir, – It is disheartening that the Irish Catholic Bishops' Conference has chosen to enter the debate on the promised referendum on civil marriage equality in an attempt to justify and perpetuate discrimination against lesbian and gay people ("Bishops say same-sex marriage would be 'grave injustice'", December 4th).
The sentiments we had been hearing about compassion and treating people with dignity and respect are beginning to sound a bit hollow. It would seem that the bishops are claiming for themselves the exclusive right to define marriage, or else are deliberately setting out to obscure the different concepts of civil marriage and the sacrament of matrimony. If the promised referendum is carried it will in no way affect or alter church marriage, which I expect would still be the choice of most couples.
Civil marriage, however, is a right provided for in the Constitution and is regulated by statute law and the civil courts. It ought not to be denied to any sector of society.
The Constitution is the expressed wish of the Irish people as to how they want their civil society ordered. An evolving social society therefore requires constitutional change to reflect its social values.
I am a church-attending Catholic but, subject to seeing the actual wording, intend voting in favour of amending the Constitution to allow same-sex marriage. I see it as my conscientious moral duty to uphold the principle of equality for all citizens before the law.
It is an issue of civil rights. – Yours, etc,
JIM O’CROWLEY,
Dublin 3.
Sir, – Stephen Collins reports on the rising support for the introduction of “same-sex marriage” (“Poll shows rising support for same-sex marriage”, Front Page, December 8th). There is no such thing as “same-sex marriage”. Since the original and accepted definition of marriage involves one man and one woman, the term “same-sex marriage” is nothing short of a travesty.
Any arrangement between two men or two women should be known by some other terminology such as “union”, “contract”, or whatever, for it is definitely not a marriage. – Yours, etc,
ROBERT A SHARPE,
Cootehill,
Co Cavan.
A chara, – Una Mullally does not appreciate what a friend she has in The Irish Times. She writes of her concern about regulations for balance in broadcasting as she launches her new book on the movement for marriage equality in Ireland ("Who does the BAI ruling on marriage equality serve?", Opinion & Analysis, December 8th).
On December 6th, your newspaper devoted 2,210 words to extracts from her book. On December 8th you published her opinion article of 853 words. In that same issue, right on the front page, Stephen Collins had 316 words on the 80 per cent of decided voters in favour of a Yes vote.
In the same issue, Mr Collins had another 412 words to say on the same topic.
Ms Mullally concludes her December 8th article: “It’s not about winning an argument, as the argument has already been won. I can wipe the floor with any anti-equality argument, but real censorship happens before you even open your mouth. Ireland has seen this social change. There is now something very dark about not being allowed speak about it.”
Not allowed to speak? – Is mise,
PÁDRAIG McCARTHY,
Sandyford,
Dublin 16.