Marriage referendum an assault on our hearts

Any proposed change to the Constitution is serious for every citizen; it should be considered only if essential and if in the best interests of all.

Does the proposal that two people of the same sex be allowed to marry meet these criteria?

Civil partnerships for same-sex relationships are law since 2011.

In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that marriage between same-sex couples was not a human right.

Marriage has a different purpose and is of a higher order. It is of one type only; between one man and one woman. This natural pairing is fundamental, and is beneficial to the couple, their families and to human society. It is also open to everyone. This is true equality.

Marriage equality in this sense has long been with us; it is enshrined in our hearts, in the Constitution, and in the law. The real need is to cherish and uphold this.

To tinker with the Constitution by injecting artificiality is folly, and this proposal is both artificial and a folly. It surreptitiously assaults our hearts and the Constitution — i.e. in the meaning and purpose of marriage and the family.

How could we even consider changing the Constitution by pretending that artificial marriage is equal to marriage, when, plainly, it is not?

The danger is in confounding and subverting many of the true values that hold all of us together. How can this be in the best interest of anyone?

Barry Jones

1 Winton Avenue

Rathgar

Dublin 6