DUP “closing doors” on LGBT community once again

On the same day that the DUP issue a statement that Sinn Féin of closing the door on Protestants in Derry, by using the Irish name for Londonderry, Doire as part of the branding for the Guildhall, they do exactly the same on LGBT people once more.

Yeah it is all well and good the DUP accusing others of closing the door on one section of Northern Irish society but when on the same day they throw in a petition of concern on the debate on equal marriage they do just that themselves. Why can’t the DUP allow a simple democratic vote in the Northern Ireland Assembly decide on this issue, or for that matter any LGBT issue? Each time one comes up you can be assured that the DUP will through down a petition of concern.

Now the mechanism was set in place to prevent one side of the historic divides nationalist or unionist for passing legislation that would adversely affect the other, needing a cross community approval. But the LGBT community and the people who would benefit from marriage equality are neither wholly nationalist nor unionist.

So while the Democratic Undemocratic Unionist Party rant about closing the doors on people, those in the LGBT community will once again be staring at a closed door on Monday, even if a majority of MLAs vote in favour the blocking petition from the DUP, if whipped will see them block the path of equality.

Now that’s the way to celebrate equal marriage legislation

In case you haven’t seen it this is what happened in the New Zealand Parliament

Now you do see those who voted no looking rather uncomfortable when the celebrations start and many have escaped when the singing starts. But the sour pusses appear to just sit there and show only anger on their faces.

We very much would like there to be that same reaction from the DUP later this month when Equal Marriage is discussed in the Assembly at Stormont. It would be great if there was a majority in the chamber who were bacing the moves that the Constitution Convention have moved to in the Republic and even if the DUP fire off yet another of their petitions of concern, the fact that they still no that they are losing the argument.

Constitutional Convention gives backing to Equal Marriage

So the news today is that the Constitution Convention for Ireland decided with 79 votes in favour to 18 against to recommend to the Oireachtas that a referendum be placed before Irish Citizens over the issue of marriage equality.

If the people of the 26 counties of the Irish Republic vote in favour of allowing their fellow citizens the right to marriage equality, they did allow civil partnerships like those in the UK only 2 years ago, Northern Ireland will stick out as a sore thumb in these isles. The Good Friday Agreement, and the subsequent Northern Ireland Act, allows all people to identify as British or Irish or both. It also recognises that there is diversity in our society that all groups whether Unionist or Nationalist, racial minorities, the disabled, victims of the troubles, women, those with children and those without and those who are LGBT to co-exist and not be discriminated against (under Section 75).

However, Northern Ireland by not recognising equal marriages and merely reducing them to the level of Civil Partnerships is failing to allow LGBT married people to identify as either fully British or fully Irish should legislation be passed in the Republic, England, Wales and Scotland. There is a possibility that there will be discriminatory practices in place and in action against those marriages carried out in either the rest of the UK or rest of the island of Ireland.

In light of this latest development the Northern Ireland Assembly has to at least look at the recognition of samee-sex marriages carried out elsewhere being recognised in Northern Ireland. But more so those who are putting their own personal views ahead of the good of the population as a whole need to understand that representative government means they have to represent.

Equal marriage does not harm anybody. It actually promotes monogamy in a part of society that those most ardently against believe is totally promiscuous. So are the people in the unionist parties (as it is largely them) who object to marriage equality actually doing so for the wider good of society? I don’t think so. Indeed some of them have on issues of equality said they are not elected to represent all parts of society. Well so much for cohesion, sharing and integration.

As Liberal Democrats we have helped bring the subject of marriage equality to the point of becoming legislation in England, Scotland and Wales. We have also worked with Northern Irish parties and individuals to bring it to the political agenda here and we will continue to do so until we have the same rights to marriage as the rest of the UK and indeed the island of Ireland.

Lucy Meadows

You may not have heard of Lucy Meadows were it not for the tragic news earlier this week, or maybe because of the sensationalism of Richard Littlejohn in the Daily Mail previously.

Lucy Meadows was a primary school teacher, who recently had starting to go the transition into the women she knew she was meant to be. Last term the headmaster issued a letter to parents advising them that the sixth year teacher they had known would be returning after the Christmas break as Miss Meadows.

However, the press, and in particular Mr Littlejohn, went on a trans-hunt which made the life of a simple school teacher so impossible that she took her own life. As this acticle in The Guardian says all she wanted “was to be me”. But the constant hounding of the media became too much for Lucy to bear.

It is hard enough for people to be themselves, but when their work colleagues, fiends and family are willing to accept them as they are. When, as is the case with Lucy, the whole town seems to have been willing to accept her for who she wanted to be it is a crying shame that the nation media decided to hound her to her untimely death.

There wasn’t really a story here, any more than there is when a gay man comes into contact with children be they his nephew or nieces, friends children or those that come across his place of work, yes even if that is a school.

You see Daily Mail those who are LGBT don’t want to convert or change everyone to be just like them, they just want everyone to accept them for who they are. So get over it and accept that there are Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transgender people in every walk of live. That is not news!

What is news is the number of times that press speculation, harassment or ridicule leads to someone, even if not directly involved in the stories, to take their own live. That is culpable manslaughter.

LGBT+ Lib Dems NI Condemn Peter Robinson playing the gay card

The First Minister has tried to regain control of the runaway train that is Unionism this evening by issuing a statment. Following calls from some of the leaders of the flag protestors calling for a return to direct rule the words of Peter Robinson, clearly speaking as leader of the DUP and not as First Minister, are trying to put fear into those with such feelings. However, his last paragraph highlights his failure to lead:

“Let them explain to the people the benefit of Water Charging and higher Regional Rates which would automatically follow Direct Rule.  And are they content to have Westminster impose same sex marriages and abortion on demand on our community?  Such folly.  Have they so quickly forgotten the decisions of direct rule in the past?”

LGBT+ Lib Dems NI Coordinator Stephen Glenn said this evening:

“At a time when tensions are still high and threats against elected representatives have not been lifted this is not the time to bring more people into the focus of anger of some of those who are protesting. By highlighting issues such as a women’s right to choose and a LGBT equality issue in such a provocatively worded statement Peter Robinson is not acting as First Minister but as a fear monger. He is fighting fire and the threat to his own authority and leadership of the Unionist community with lighter fluid. This is not the act of a leader.”

The LGBT community in Northern Ireland face enough difficulties without being seen and promoted as something that is not Northern Irish, or non-Unionist in this way from the person who happens to also be the First Minister. Using a cross community issue like equal marriage as a tool in this way is malicious and though not as direct an incitement as made by his wife in recent years is not a helpful statement to be made in the current climate.

LGBT Lib Dems will be calling on Peter Robinson to apologise and recant his use of LGBT issues in this debate, or is that debacle.

DUP ask members is homosexuality wrong

Hat tip to Alan in Belfast over at Slugger O’Toole

The DUP at that conference  handed out a members survey, I’m not surprised by that I’m used to filling in ones for the Lib Dems at conferences all the time, plus there is the Lib Dem Voice monthly membership surveys on matters of policy.

However, one of the questions is interesting.

Page from DUP membership survey

It comes at the bottom of the middle box to the right hand side of this image (taken from the Slugger post).

The first three ‘issues’ are one that do affect all of Northern Ireland at the moment. The first is about the use of academic selection to deternine children’s place in secondary education. The next for the area of the UK with the only land border to the Eurozone is about adopting the Euro, the next is about legalising abortion.

But it is the last one that isn’t so much an issue that is being discussed in Northern Ireland today and is simply “homosexuality is wrong”.

Now the issue that is being discussed is not concerning the rightness nor wrongness of homosexuality but extending marriage equality to same-sex couples. Placing this in the same box as the other three raises questions about why this question is on this questionaire.

Are the DUP looking to see if their members give them enough support to turn the clock back 30 years to recriminalise homosexuality here? Also why are they asking a question about the rightness or wrongness of something that is protected in the Belfast Agreement as a minority community?

Later on in the personal details section there is a question about partnership status. You can check, single, married or living as married, but there is no option for civil partnership. So it would appear that the DUP are quite happy to have members living in sin living as married out of wedlock but aren’t prepared to recognise a nationally recognised contract of union in civil partnership.

At least that was my first thought, then I saw what they really meant.

The DUP are obviously allowing civil partnered members to check the married box, or living as married. So why then are then objecting to it so strongly any time it is debated?

So the DUP survey betrays their true heart. If you are a gay person who is not single you are either married or living as married. Oh the joy that finally the DUP have realised the truth. I look forward to the public statement to this effect when Stormont meets on Monday.

In response to Dr Hazlett Lynch

Those of us in Northern Ireland who read the Newsletter letters page are well aware of Dr J E Hazlett Lynch. He makes another appearance in today’s letters page with the following:

MAY I use your columns to ask if anyone knows what the position of the churches is after the close victory in the Assembly (50:45) in favour of the traditional view of marriage?

I know that some of those politicians who voted against marriage as understood in the scriptures and who abstained or absented themselves from that vote claim to be church members.

Do the churches of which these politicians are members still hold to the biblical understanding of marriage and, if so, are they prepared to tolerate those within their membership who have publicly either voted against and undermined church teaching and/or absented/abstained from the vote?

What steps will churches take to discipline those who acted thus?

There have been many cases in ecclesiastical history that the church has taken different views on a number of issues. Something that an historian like Dr Lynch should be aware of. The abolition of slavery, universal suffrage for women and before that female property rights and mixed race marriage; all have these have seen Christians on different sides of the argument. Here in Northern Ireland we even saw one Christian side gerrymandering election districts to keep the other out as recently as the 1960s and 70s at the behest of their Churches. Also one of our Churches leaders as an elected representative to the European Parliament was ejected for calling the Pope the anti-Christ as recently as 1988. So when we call for our politicians to follow the

Indeed if any lesson should be drawn from history it is this pastor from a church in Missouri recently.

So in answer to Dr Lynch’s question there hasn’t been an established church in the island of Ireland since 1871 and the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland. So the church does not have a direct role in the government of our nation.  We also have The Agreement which sets out a number of freedoms which include:

Human Rights
1. The parties affirm their commitment to the mutual respect, the civil
rights and the religious liberties of everyone in the community. Against
the background of the recent history of communal conflict, the parties
affirm in particular:

• the right of free political thought;
• the right to freedom and expression of religion;
• the right to pursue democratically national and political aspirations;
• the right to seek constitutional change by peaceful and legitimate means;
• the right to equal opportunity in all social and economic activity, regardless of class, creed, disability, gender or ethnicity;

That right to free political thought applies to members of churches as much as the non-churched. There is also a freedom and expression of each individual’s religion, which includes to what extent they separate their personal faith from their public responsibilities. This may be the issue that Dr Lynch cannot comprehend, it is possible to have a faith yet listen to the needs and wants of those that do not share that faith, or even just one interpretation of that faith, and come to a conclusion of what is best that isn’t solely blinkered by one’s religious world view.

What Dr Lynch and many others who take the view that those of faith betrayed their faith missed from the motion was that there was a call for strong protection to be put into legislation so that those who held a particular faith few that was contrary would not be persecuted for disagreeing. Therefore managing to cover a number of the freedoms listed above, ironically while also supporting possibly the position of their own faith group while voting in favour of equal marriage.

Of course there are biblical laws on all sorts of issues including adultery that result in a death penalty, yet we don’t follow all those rulings from Leviticus and Deuteronomy to the letter. Yet I don’t see cries for church discipline to be brought in for those other underminings of the tradition view of marriage, just to keep it in context.

However, the myopia of Dr Lynch over the way the motion was worded does not prevent him calling on those who have exercised both their freedom of political thought to have the same bearing as their freedom to expression of religion. He is saying that the latter should take precedence over the former when to govern fully both need their freedom, something that the original motion did take into consideration.

That my dear Doctor is my response to you on this issue.

 

Lack of tolerance putting Northern Ireland in a bad light

Yesterday the editorial in the Belfast Telegraph stating that the reaction of senior figures to LGBT and abortion issues was putting Northern Ireland in a bad light.

Here is the text of that editorial in full:

Abortion and the rights of gay people are issues which are never far from controversy in Northern Ireland.

Polar opposite opinions are often expressed with equal conviction and it has to be recognised that in this society religious beliefs play a very important role. Opinion formers and politicians must all take into account the substantial number of people whose views on these issues could be classified as liberal.

Health Minister Edwin Poots is undoubtedly a man of strong personal convictions, but he is taking the wrong approach in challenging the |High Court decision which ruled that the ban on gay and unmarried couples adopting in Northern Ireland is discriminatory. At a time when we are all being urged to exercise fiscal prudence and when the public purse is constantly tightening, his determination to carry on the legal fight may be perceived by many as a waste of public funds.

This newspaper also finds the intervention of the province’s Attorney General John Larkin in the controversy over the opening of the Marie Stopes clinic in Belfast somewhat disquieting. He has written to the Justice Committee asking it to look into the practices of the clinic and also offered his services to the committee in his non-statutory role as guardian of the rule of law. He is not allowed to intervene in his official capacity, and it is surprising to see a legal figure of his stature voluntarily becoming involved when the expectation would have been for him to stand aloof from the issue in case of some future need to adjudicate.

While the interventions of Mr Poots and Mr Larkin are entirely separate, their unfortunate conjunction in time sends out an unfortunate message. The High Court, the highest tribunal in the land, has ruled on gay adoption and found the current ban untenable. The Marie Stopes clinic says it has no intention of breaching the stringent laws here on abortion. However, and this may be an unintended consequence, the interventions create the unfortunate impression that Northern Ireland is a less tolerant place than it really is.

When a paper for 140 years part of the establishment of unionist Northern Ireland points out that unionist leaders are holding Northern Ireland back on these issues you know that the unionist politicians are not necessarily speaking for the entire unionist population. Remember only 3 unionists voted in favour of marriage equality at the start of the month.

Poots to challenge High Court ruling on adoption

Homosexuality was only legalised in Northern Ireland after a court case.

Earlier today we reported that because of a court case the High Court had ruled that the prohibition of civil partners from adopting was unlawful, while lesbian or gay individuals were able to adopt providing they weren’t married or adopted.

Now the health minister Edwin Poots has yet again let his personal feelings get in the way of an objective ruling on a point of law. He has said within hours of the ruling that he will challenge the decision of the High Court.

“It is my intention to urgently appeal this judgment and I am taking this action with a heavy heart.

“I have already publicly declared my intention to reform Northern Ireland adoption law because reform is much needed and long overdue.

“This judicial review has already delayed plans to introduce a new Adoption and Children Bill in the [Northern Ireland] Assembly and I fear that this will lead to further delay.”

Now the delay is because the Adoption (Northern Ireland) Order 1987 differed from the regulations for adoption in the rest of the UK. The judicial review came about when it became apparent that the Northern Ireland Assembly chose to deliberately remove the option of anyone in a civil partnership from adopting while maintaining that individuals still could, irrespective of sexual orientation. The easiest way to prevent further delay is to take on board the ruling of the judicial review. Ah, but that would be far too easy and far too wrong for the Health Minister.

Earlier this year the Attorney General for Northern Ireland, John Larkin QC, even tried to argue to the European Court of Human Rights that Austria should not allow same-sex couples to adopt as this would impact on Northern Ireland. Yet this court decision was made in Northern Ireland about Northern Irish people.

The DUP are using every means at their disposal to block any increase in LGBT equality legislation. Poots himself is refusing to countenance any lifting of the lifetime ban on men who have had sex with another man giving blood (despite not widely consulting on this issue). Ahead of the motion on equal marriage it was they that raised a petition of concern, effectively allowing their party to whip a unionist veto. Now even when a High Court makes a review on an issue they are challenging it straight away. Even the original decriminalisation decision was opposed by all Northern Ireland MPs when the vote came to the Commons in 1982.

It is time for the DUP to look at the universal good and not maintain a narrow world view on decisions in this area. Our legislators from the DUP and others do continue to make us appear to be a back water.

Northern Ireland gay adoption ban unlawful

Earlier this year we raised the issue of the discriminatory Northern Ireland policy preventing Lesbian and Gay couples from adopting.

Today in the High Court in Belfast Mr Justice Treacy has deemed that the ban was unlawful. He said:

“Excluding persons from the whole adoption process on the sole basis of their relationship status can only serve to narrow the pool of potential adopters which cannot be in the best interests of children.”

Unlike in the rest of the UK legislation in Northern Ireland deliberately went out of its way to exclude those in civil partnerships from adoption, while maintaining that individuals could still legally adopt. As we said earlier it meant that a lesbian or gay man were not prevented from adopting as long as they had no partner, or at least not one recognised by the state. But if they were committed to a relationship then they would not be allowed to adopt. Speaking on this issue Mr Justice Treacy said:

“In choosing to make a public commitment to one another, they become totally excluded both as individuals and as a couple from eligibility to adopt, ie not eligible at all.

“This is quite irrational and plainly unlawful.

“The present legislation essentially entails that a gay or lesbian person must choose between being eligible to adopt, or affirming their relationship in public via a civil partnership ceremony.”

The Northern Ireland Attorney General, John Larkin QC, had argued on behalf of the Department of Health that the change wouldn’t be in the best interests of the children, contending that Northern Ireland’s adoption laws were to ensure child welfare rather than satisfy the wishes of would-be parents. But Mr Justice Treacy stated:

“The rigorous scrutiny and assessment of suitability will ensure that only persons capable of providing a loving, safe and secure adoptive home will ultimately be considered.”

He acknowledged that that issues such as sexual orientation, lifestyle, race and religion must be taken into account, but added:

“But they cannot be allowed to prevail over what is in the best interests of the child.”

With the high number of children in Northern Ireland waiting for adoption the Equality Commission’s Chief Commissioner, Professor Michael O’Flaherty said of the ruling:

“Given the high numbers of children in care, who need a family in Northern Ireland, the importance of this case in widening the pool of prospective parents cannot be overstated. We are therefore delighted with this outcome.

“It brings Northern Ireland law in line with the rest of the UK and means that couples who are not married, those in civil partnerships and same sex couples will be now be allowed to apply to adopt.”