Sir, – In Ireland in 2012 there were 72,225 births and 49 domestic adoption orders granted, 33 of which were to family members and 16 to non-family. Perhaps we can now get back to discussing the referendum on same-sex marriage. – Yours, etc,
JUSTIN McALEESE,
Dublin 4.
Sir, – The proposed amendment tells us that marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex. It suggests that we can change the meaning of marriage. The defining element of the distinction between a male and a female is to be no longer required.
Human nature finds expression in either male or female. Marriage – as the intimate union of man and woman – is the unique expression and embodiment of the wholeness of human nature and is therefore given a distinct status in our Constitution in accordance with this reality. Neither man, nor woman, fully captures what it is to be human but in their union, including a sexual union, man and woman capture something about the wholeness and integrity of human nature in its entirety.
The pressure for same-sex marriage is self-defeating. In seeking equality with something unlike yourself, by changing it in order to join it, the thing that you join is no longer what you were trying to join in the first place.
It is not necessary to change the definition of marriage in order to give constitutional recognition to same-sex unions. A different referendum in this country could give constitutional protection to civil partnerships while preserving the distinction between marriage and these partnerships. This would give constitutional recognition to same-sex unions but not in a way which obliterates the true meaning of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
Can we not find a group of people with different views on this issue who could formulate a new recognition for same-sex unions in our Constitution which is really dignified, graceful and imaginative while retaining the truthful meaning of marriage as between a man and a woman? This would honour the dignity of difference and lead to the most truthful resolution of this question. The first step, however, is to vote No in this forthcoming referendum. – Yours, etc
PATRICK TREACY SC,
Dr RIK
VAN NIEUWENHOVE,
Dublin 7.
Sir, – In the interests of balance, not to mention the sanity of the surprisingly large portion of us for whom same-sex marriage is neither the most important human-rights issue facing mankind nor the end of family life as we have known it, column inches and broadcast minutes devoted to the subject should be the same as those dedicated to the other referendum taking place on the same day. – Yours, etc,
DAVE SLATER,
Kilkea, Co Kildare.
Sir, – Thank God for the daily "pause" for the Angelus on RTÉ. It's not that I'm a devout Catholic but that particular minute of peace seems to be the only programme that does not feature a member of the Iona Institute. – Yours, etc,
PAT BURKE WALSH,
Ballymoney,
Co Wexford.