Marriage equality will “scrape through” in Ireland — Panti Bliss
Image: Panti Bliss
IRISH drag star and gay rights activist Panti Bliss, who is in Australia for the annual Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras, has told the Star Observer she is optimistic Ireland will vote for same-sex marriage in the country’s upcoming referendum.
However, she added that she doesn’t underestimate the opposition.
If Ireland votes yes on May 22 it will become the 18th country worldwide to legalise same-sex marriage including New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, the Netherlands, Uruguay and most parts of the UK.
Marriage equality is backed by Ireland’s four major parties while a January poll in Irish news publication The Journal said 76 per cent of voters plan to vote in favour of reform.
However, Bliss — who spoke to the Star Observer this weekend as she prepared to lead the Irish float on the Mardi Gras Parade down Oxford and Flinders streets — said the result was far less clear-cut.
“I think it will be very close but I am very cautiously optimistic,” the performer said.
“I think it will scrape through but it’s going to be difficult.”
Ireland’s still-influential Catholic church, alongside a number of conservative advocacy groups such as the Iona Institute, are campaigning for a no vote chiefly on the grounds that marriage is a vehicle for procreation.
Last week, the Irish Catholic Bishop of Elphin Kevin Doran said gay people were already allowed to marry – just not each other.
Nevertheless, support for LGBTI inclusion is high on the Irish political agenda.
So much so that the Irish Dancing Queens parade entry, which Bliss was part of, was supported by Ireland’s consulate general and the government-backed Tourism Ireland body.
Bliss, who is a creation of Rory O’Neill and a major star in Ireland, said same-sex marriage was also inevitable in Australia.
“I think marriage equality is coming to everywhere eventually and the sooner everyone jumps on board the better,” she said.
“I wouldn’t want to be one of the last, I’d rather be in one of the first.
Bliss pinpointed the anomaly that could occur on the island of Ireland following a yes vote.
“What will be super embarrassing will be Northern Ireland because if it passes in the Republic then Northern Ireland will be the only part of the UK and Ireland that doesn’t have marriage equality,” she said.
While the UK’s first same-sex civil partnerships in 2005 occurred in Northern Ireland’s capital of Belfast, the largely self-governing region has yet to introduce same-sex marriage.
This resistance has continued despite the other nations of the UK – England, Scotland and Wales – all introducing same-sex marriage last year with polls in Northern Ireland showing the population is split on the issue.
If Ireland voted yes “there will be this tiny little spot left in the middle,” Bliss said of Northern Ireland.
This witty pro-marriage equality video depicts an Irish family struggling to cope with “armagayddon” following a yes vote:
______________
Paul of Forbes. I don’t know what drives you or anything showing a great IQ in your own case. I don’t know anything about your ‘Bill introduced’ either. To quote the rather mysterious Department of Transport advertisement however ‘get your hand off it’ might still result in a solution.
On the basis of your comment, you have no idea of what an IQ ‘is’ and whilst I agree with a hearty suspicion about Abbott and Fred Nile as politicians ..and their parliamentary followers it is foolhardy to think that ‘gay’ claims should be accepted by any or all people. Yes there has been a new order push for it and some have accepted it.
Co-incidentally I am in agreement with apparently bi-sexual Julia Gillard on the subject of ‘gay marriage’ and I also am , though with much surrounding argument, against long-term fostering and adoption by homosexuals. Setting aside the international homosexual rings of ‘gay couples’ adopting children for grooming the recent and past paedophile crimes against boys were almost entirely by homosexuals. People have a right to be suspicious of what ‘gays’ are ‘on about’.
Corrie Bernadi who has no effect on my life has been spun by the typical media hysteria for sales and some homosexuals who hear only what they want to hear. Not long before his comment in the parliament ‘out of the blue’ on Q and A one chap who’s name I forget…with no relevance to anything in the session. came the statement that people having sex with animals was a victimless crime and should be off the statutes.
I am well aware of some homosexuals who use animals for individual and gang sex but then so do some heterosexuals so it would be wrong to discriminate there. Bernadi didn’t go into it deeply however. He made a comment which deserved serious consideration as a ‘what if’ or ‘if that then why not this’..
The rather stunned panel and audience at Q and A made some lame jokes about it but it was from that source that Bernadi drew his suggestion which I paraphrase as that ‘next we will be approving marriage to animals’….a very rational extrapolation.
I don’ recall him raising incest as a homosexual trait but I do know a few men who as youths had sex with their (willing) sisters and nieces who were as young as 10 years old. The girls were always willing so there’s quite a lot of deeper discussion which could be had on the sexuality of children however under our laws we are required to resist such activities. Those who enjoy it may disagree.
These heterosexuals are not bombarding parliament for a change to that law so more can ‘come out’ and get off with their sisters and nieces or other youngsters. They are not bombarding parliament to change the view on close-blood marriage. We all have restriction of one kind or another placed on us.
I see no reason for the ratification of homosexual marriage and my ‘IQ’ is rated well above anything which could be demonstrated by Nile or Abbott even at their peak…. In making my decision I have taken into account all I can of all views and ethics and morality are tertiary to it.
On Bernadi again…In the perhaps darker sexual world of sexual excitement of humans by animals and the use of those animals in oral anal and vaginal sex and masturbation of the animal would certainly see people who see no reason why they should not marry their dog or horse or cow or bull if for no other reason than ‘I want to’ .
Why are satanic masses, some with human sacrifice, well known to be performed?, how is it that freemasons can consider themselves ‘normal’ and ‘good men being made better’ ,? and other such humbug they go on with…. how is it that magistrates are so hard on addicts in some courts when themselves alcoholics?….How is it prison warders are allowed to get away with appalling behaviour towards inmates?…why should anyone be bashed, buggared or murdered in our jails..? with some heroes of society claiming they deserve it.
If you delve you’ll find a morass of contradiction and other contra-indicators to decent behaviour throughout the world but I don’t think ‘so called’… ‘marriage equality’ fits in ether criminality or morality. I think it has a place in ethical argument yes, but I cannot yet see anything but deterioration of society from capitulating to it.
I also disagree absolutely with ‘conscience-voting’ whether it supports my views or not. Politicians are to represent electorates not their own conscience and that can be made abundantly clear in the speeches they make.
As with any representation of a group as I might do in management I do not have to align myself with a group ‘outcome’ say at board level to play my role in implementation of a decision or in representation. My options of protest and even resignation are still available to me.
Those of us who see ‘marriage equality’ as a furphy for the gain of a in earlier times disadvantaged or abused group of people or who simply believe ‘this is not the direction society should take’ represent a society which has come to be protective of homosexuals. That does not require us to then offer them marriage nor the fostering and adopting of children Voila.
My Bill just introduced “Marriage Amendment (Equality) Bill 2015” –
(a) This legislation becomes affective from the day of Royal Assent.
(b) This legislation applies to all of Australia and its states and territories, including all the external territories.
Amendments to both the Family Law Act 1975 and the Marriage Act 1961 –
1. Omit all references to: – “a man and a woman”. Wherever occurring, under both those Acts.
2. Substitute all references to: – “any two adult persons”. Wherever occurring, under both those Acts.
3. Repeal section 88EA only in the Marriage Act 1961.
Siobhan Clancy
I love our spokeswoman! !!! #irelandloveslove
Hehe.
Marriage equality by Slovenia in March, Ireland in May and a SCOTUS decision in June!
That “armagayddon” is a very clever ad and just goes to show you how bigots (with an IQ of 0 for example both Fred Nile and Tony Abbott and even Cory Bernardi obsession with incest and bestiality) can control debate in this country and they really sound stupid and pathetic!
Liam Stewart