John B. Lambe

The Irish #Referendums:
The Care Referendum proposes to remove some out-dated (from 1937), well-meant, but sexist language from our Constitution. It would be embarrassing if it were defeated.
/1
#Referendum #CareReferendum #FamilyReferendum

https://www.electoralcommission.ie/referendums/referendum-information/what-are-you-being-asked-to-decide-on/

What are you being asked to decide on? - Electoral Commission

On 8 March 2024, Irish citizens will be asked to vote in two referendums to change our Constitution. The first Referendum concerns the concept of Family in the Constitution The second Referendum proposes to delete an existing part of the Constitution and insert new text providing recognition for care provided by family members to each … Continued

Electoral Commission
Mar 7, 2024 at 9:35pmWeb
Show threadJohn B. LambeMar 7, 2024

Some arguments that I've heard against the referendums:

- "Durable relationships" is not defined, and it might not include, for example, single-parent families.
Even it does not include them (and I expect that it would), how would that be worse than the current situation? They're *clearly* not considered families under the current wording.
/2

Show threadJohn B. LambeMar 7, 2024
- It's taking mothers out of the constitution:
No, it's taking a *reference* to mothers out of the constitution, and it's a negatively discriminatory reference. The Constitution does not have to refer to every cohort of people individually. A lot of other groups are not specifically mentioned either. (And there are a lot of words not in it - it's not a dictionary.) And the reason that there was no need to mention them specifically is that the Constitution does not treat them differently.
/3
Show threadJohn B. LambeMar 7, 2024
- Some argue that they should go further, or they would prefer a different wording.
Yes, but that's not a good reason for rejecting them. They're better than the current situation, and there isn't likely to be another referendum on the matters anytime soon.
/4
Show threadJohn B. LambeMar 7, 2024
Admittedly, the Care Amendment doesn't achieve a non-sexist equivalent of what was intended in the current Article 41.2.2°. That would be that the State should endeavour to ensure that it is possible for one parent (either one) in a couple to choose not to work in the labour market, so that children would have more time with a parent.
That could be problematic too, since the parent who doesn't work would usually be the mother, but at least that's not in the wording.
/5 #CareReferendum #YesYes
Show threadJohn B. LambeMar 7, 2024
Wording like that would *allow* a non-sexist society, while acknowledging the desirability of parents having the option/ability to spend more time with their children.
I think the proposed change is an important improvement though, removing sexist language.
/6 #YesYes
Show threadJoe WokeMar 9, 2024
@JohnBLambe I’m truly embarrassed as a 60yr old male. How we can leave such sexist outdated language in our constitution is appalling. #referendum