Become A Member | Forum | Profiles | Personals | Classifieds | See Who's Online ...
 
View Topic
  Message Boards : Activism / Politics : View Topic : 115 Posts, Page 3 of 8
  HomeNewNoticesHot TopicsPollsStatsBlogs Login / Register
 
GLEN News / Press Releases
 
# 31 : Thursday 12-4-2012 @ 18:50
 
 
Someone said :
I am not saying they are perfect and there are no issues.

Good
Reply
 
 Recent Message Board Topics
Post Putin Russia?
X Factor 2017
Homophobia In Sports
The New Housing Crisis
Gay Men In Chechnya Being Sent To Concentration Camps
Keep/Repeal The 8th, Referendum?
Big Mouth
Whatever Happened To....
 
Hey! If you enjoy shooting the breeze with like-minded people, check out
our Message Boards
• Advice • Coming Out
• Computers • Current Affairs
• Discussion • Food & Drink
• Going Out • Humour
• Health • Music
• Newbies • Sexual Issues
# 32 : Friday 13-4-2012 @ 10:59
 
 
Whose perception is that GLEN is only "slightly" arrogant and only "somewhat" elitist? If I had been asked, the adjectives would have been different.

Reply
 
# 33 : Friday 13-4-2012 @ 11:47
 
 
Someone said :

They may not speak for you but do you realise how much they achieved for you? As someone who was about 18 in 1993 you may not realise how big and how effective a role GLEN played in the campaign to decriminalise homosexual acts. They were effective because they were low key and relied on the power of reasoned persuasion rather than shouting and roaring

Oh, I'm so sorry that I dared to besmirch GLEN's honourable and good name. Of course it was solely GLEN who lobbied for decriminalisation and it really didn't have to do with the Norris v The State case decision at the ECHR or the fact that former Minister for Justice Maire Geoghegan Quinn was swayed in favour of reforming the law after listening to the appeals of the mother of a gay son.

I suppose I'm just an ungrateful ingenue who apparently hasn't appreciated all that GLEN has done for me. I'm so sorry for being so unappreciative.
Reply
 
# 34 : Friday 13-4-2012 @ 13:32
 
 
JupiterKid, i don't think anyone suggested that GLEN alone achieved decriminalisation. I would remind you that it took five years for the Government to react to the ECHR judgement. Furthermore an Irish Times story revealed that there were several proposals for reform being prepared by the Dept of Justice. One of these was to simply replicate the then existing British law, i.e. gay sex still illegal for members of the armed forces and police and no more than two guys at a time in any premises!! It was lobbying by GLEN that ensured that what resulted was so satisfactory. Of course they were not alone in lobbying but I believe that their modus operandi made their lobbying particularly effective. If I am not mistaken the Parents group, whose leader met the Minister, was working with GLEN.

I have no axe to grind. I am not a member of GLEN and don't personally know anyone who is or was a member. As a gay man I am grateful for their work and believe they are often subject to unfair criticism - perhaps because they have not been the best at communication to the general gay population.
Reply
 
# 35 : Friday 13-4-2012 @ 14:00
 
 
I'd love to know what GLEN did to Ozren. It must have been really bad....
Reply
 
# 36 : Friday 13-4-2012 @ 14:22
 
 
What part of the constitution needs to be changed to allow gay marriage?
Reply
 
# 37 : Friday 13-4-2012 @ 14:37
 
 
Someone said :
What part of the constitution needs to be changed to allow gay marriage?

There are pledges in the constitution to protect the family, and marriage, though neither are defined.

There was a case (I forget the details) that had nothing to with gay marriage, where the judge defined marriage as part of his judgement. He said it was between a man and a woman. Even though he was not commenting on gay marriage this has been taken to set a precedent, and was part of the Zappone Gilligan judgement.
Reply
 
# 38 : Friday 13-4-2012 @ 18:41
 
 
Someone said :
What part of the constitution needs to be changed to allow gay marriage?

It depends who you ask, but I don't believe constitutional change is necessary. Most reasonable people disagree with this.
ReplyWebsite
 
# 39 : Friday 13-4-2012 @ 18:45
 
 
Someone said :

It depends who you ask, but I don't believe constitutional change is necessary. Most reasonable people disagree with this.

The thing is it really only depends on the opinion of the Supreme Court justices... and I think they probably would find that it was defined as between a man and a woman.
Reply
 
# 40 : Saturday 14-4-2012 @ 10:16
 
 
Someone said :
the fact that former Minister for Justice Maire Geoghegan Quinn was swayed in favour of reforming the law after listening to the appeals of the mother of a gay son.

In all fairness GLEN bought that woman in. GLEN in 1993 and 2012 are very different organisations. Back then they were more communicative, less funded, less arrogant, slightly more lesbian friendly
Reply
 
# 41 : Saturday 14-4-2012 @ 18:49
 
 
Someone said :
In all fairness GLEN bought that woman in. GLEN in 1993 and 2012 are very different organisations. Back then they were more communicative, less funded, less arrogant, slightly more lesbian friendly

I know GLEN has done sterling work to advance LGBT right and equality over the past 30 years or so, and I'm not denying that and the importance of their contributions but I don't like being condescended to as I was earlier in the thread by John.k that I am somehow "ungrateful" to GLEN for having the freedoms and rights that I enjoy today.

In fact, while we all benefit from the long struggle for equality and should acknowledge those who fought and still fight for equality, IMO no-one should have to feel that thay have to be a an obsequious sycophant to any person or organisation for the work that they did in the past.
Reply
 
# 42 : Friday 20-4-2012 @ 12:53
 
 
New Human Rights Commission Proposals Important for Lesbian and Gay People

Today, the Minister for Justice and Equality, Alan Shatter TD published the report of the ‘Working Group on the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC)’. The report sets out recommendations to the Minister on the establishment of a new body to replace the Equality Authority and the Irish Human Rights Commission.

“Many of the proposals in the report have a direct impact on lesbian, gay and bisexual people. In particular, GLEN strongly welcomes the proposal that the definition of human rights for the new body would take into account ‘new and emerging human rights’,“ said Brian Sheehan of GLEN.

“This new definition would enable the new IHREC to support access to civil marriage for same sex couples which the Equality Authority has consistently called for, following the principle of equality on the basis of sexual orientation” said Sheehan.
“The Equality Authority has played a very important proactive role in advancing equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. We strongly welcome the proposals that the new body will retain that promotional and development role, and the proposal that the functions of both organisations are being carried forward.” continued Sheehan.

“Meaningful equality for lesbian and gay people will be significantly enhanced by the proposal for a positive duty on public bodies to have regard to equality and human rights. This could mean that, for example, schools would be obliged to consider how young LGBT people are treated in schools and to put in places measures to ensure that they are safe, supported and affirmed. This proposal offers the possibility to mainstream provision for LGBT people across a very wide area of public service provision, and is strongly welcomed” said Sheehan.

The Working Group also recommended that the new IHREC consider changes in other areas of legislation, including in Section 37 of the Employment Equality Act (EEA) and the inclusion of gender identity as a new discrimination ground. Section 37 of the EEA may allow for the possibility of lesbian and gay employees of religious controlled institutions to be discriminated against in access to or in employment and has acted as a ‘chill factor’ for lesbian and gay teachers. A Bill to amend Section 37 is currently before the Seanad.

Reply
 
# 43 : Wednesday 2-5-2012 @ 23:41
 
 
Defeat of Employment Equality Bill a missed opportunity to protect LGBT employees

GLEN has expressed its disappointment at the defeat of the Employment Equality (Amendment) Bill 2012 in the Seanad this evening. The Bill, brought forward by Senator Averil Power of Fianna Fáil, sought to amend Section 37.1 of the Employment Equality Act 1998 to remove any prospect of employees in religious run institutions being discriminated against based on who they are.

“We supported this Bill and applaud Senator Power for proposing it. The defeat of the Bill is very disappointing and represents a missed opportunity to address the fear of discrimination felt by many, in particular lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) teachers, before the beginning of another school year” said Kieran Rose, GLEN Chair

The Bill aimed to remove the fear of employees and prospective employees in religious run institutions, such as schools and hospitals, that they could be discriminated against just because they are married, single, divorced or in a civil partnership, or because they are lesbian or gay.

“While the debate was overwhelmingly supportive, issues were raised on some complexities consequent on the proposed Bill. It is unfortunate that the Bill was voted down by the Government. If it had been accepted, the next Stage, Committee Stage, could have been used as an opportunity to discuss further any legal complexities” said Rose.

“Strong statements of support addressing the issues of protection of LGBT teachers were expressed by both Ministers Alan Shatter and Ruairi Quinn, who both attended the debate, and by Senators from across all Parties. We welcome the commitment of the Government to address the issues and GLEN will continue work with Government and the Oireachtas to seek progress on this issue” said Rose.

“While no case has yet been brought which alleges discrimination in this context, the threat implied by Section 37.1 has acted as a ‘chill factor’ for lesbian and gay teachers. It has meant that employees or prospective employees, whose lives may possibly be interpreted to be contrary to the religious ethos of some religions, have lived in fear for their jobs and their prospects within their employment” said Rose.

GLEN note that the current Programme for Government commits to address the issue, which has been continually identified by Teachers Unions, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) teachers groups and LGBT groups as a potential barrier to employment by LGBT people in religious run institutions. The Programme for Government commits that “publically identified LGBT people should not be deterred from training or taking up employment as teachers in the State.”
Reply
 
# 44 : Wednesday 2-5-2012 @ 23:54
 
 
Someone said :
Defeat of Employment Equality Bill a missed opportunity to protect LGBT employees

GLEN has expressed its disappointment at the defeat of the Employment Equality (Amendment) Bill 2012 in the Seanad this evening. The Bill, brought forward by Senator Averil Power of Fianna Fáil, sought to amend Section 37.1 of the Employment Equality Act 1998 to remove any prospect of employees in religious run institutions being discriminated against based on who they are.

“We supported this Bill and applaud Senator Power for proposing it. The defeat of the Bill is very disappointing and represents a missed opportunity to address the fear of discrimination felt by many, in particular lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) teachers, before the beginning of another school year” said Kieran Rose, GLEN Chair

The Bill aimed to remove the fear of employees and prospective employees in religious run institutions, such as schools and hospitals, that they could be discriminated against just because they are married, single, divorced or in a civil partnership, or because they are lesbian or gay.

“While the debate was overwhelmingly supportive, issues were raised on some complexities consequent on the proposed Bill. It is unfortunate that the Bill was voted down by the Government. If it had been accepted, the next Stage, Committee Stage, could have been used as an opportunity to discuss further any legal complexities” said Rose.

“Strong statements of support addressing the issues of protection of LGBT teachers were expressed by both Ministers Alan Shatter and Ruairi Quinn, who both attended the debate, and by Senators from across all Parties. We welcome the commitment of the Government to address the issues and GLEN will continue work with Government and the Oireachtas to seek progress on this issue” said Rose.

“While no case has yet been brought which alleges discrimination in this context, the threat implied by Section 37.1 has acted as a ‘chill factor’ for lesbian and gay teachers. It has meant that employees or prospective employees, whose lives may possibly be interpreted to be contrary to the religious ethos of some religions, have lived in fear for their jobs and their prospects within their employment” said Rose.

GLEN note that the current Programme for Government commits to address the issue, which has been continually identified by Teachers Unions, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) teachers groups and LGBT groups as a potential barrier to employment by LGBT people in religious run institutions. The Programme for Government commits that “publically identified LGBT people should not be deterred from training or taking up employment as teachers in the State.”

Shatter's speech in the Seanad was a very vigorous dismantling of the Bill. Not a good sign for the future prospects for meaningful reform, whatever the conciliatory remarks intended to soften the blow/have it both ways.
Reply
 
# 45 : Thursday 3-5-2012 @ 00:04
 
 
This is not good news. The government should be pushing more strongly for social reforms as the economic issues are largely out of their contol at the moment (in control by the "Troika.")

What parts of the Bill were problematic and what TDs opposed it on homophobic grounds?
Reply
 
Prev 12345678Next