- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 18,425
- Reaction score
- 32
I'm pretty sure he's referring to the way the Irish Constitution has to be amended. The only way to do so is through referendum, per Irish law. While they could have, like you said, argued a specific legal interpretation of the non-explicit stance the constitution takes, they would still have had to go to referendum in order to explicitly amend the Irish Constitution.Not necessarily. The Irish constitution does have a section about family and marriage, but there's nothing that I know of that specifically references marriage being one man and one woman. The closest it comes to doing that is mentioning protections for women who choose to be caregivers/homemakers (which in and of itself is a weird thing to have in a constitution). So it could be legally interpreted to say that same-sex marriage is allowed without the need for an amendment to the constitution. I would imagine, though, that a referendum was the safest route to prevent court challenges.
Either way, voting on rights is not something that should be encouraged unless it's absolutely necessary. It can be fine if it turns out well, but there's a serious and ugly downside to that avenue as well - i.e. if it fails, and rights are therefore dictated by the whims of the electorate.