Irish voters are heading to the polls on International Women’s Day — Friday — to remove the words “woman” and “mother” from the Constitution.
Also up for vote: a measure that would widely expand the definition of “family.”
Two amendments are on the ballot: Article 39, on the family, and Article 40, on the role of women/mothers in society.
Article 39 would redefine the family to a grouping “founded on marriage,” as the Constitution now says, “or on other durable relationships.”
The proponents of the changes argue the current wording is exclusionary to single-parent and nonmarried households.
“The relationship that exists between a child and their mother or father when they’re born, that’s the one-parent family,” Prime Minister Leo Varadkar has said. “It’s committed, it’s caring, it’s long-lasting.”
But the vague inclusion of “durable relationships” has caused more confusion.
Nobody — neither voters nor politicians — seems to have a clear definition of the term.
As is the case in America, unenumerated rights feature in Irish jurisprudence.
Some Irish politicians have refused to rule out the Irish courts recognizing polygamy as a family.
One even implied a bigamous relationship could constitute a family under the proposed change.
In Ireland 2024, bigamy could become, as per Article 40 of the Constitution, “inalienable and imprescriptible” and “antecedent and superior to all positive law.”
Irish Sen. Rónán Mullen has described the wording as a “constitutional novelty.”
While Irish government minister Roderic O’Gorman insists polygamy won’t be recognized under the change as it does not constitute a “moral institution in Irish law,” he has also said: “The courts can ultimately decide in individual cases.”
Irish Judge Marie Baker detailed that a “durable relationship” could mean a couple who have received a single Christmas card or wedding invitation!
The changes could even affect Ireland’s immigration levels, which have skyrocketed in recent months.
Irish minister Neale Richmond has said the change will have “serious consequences” for Ireland’s “immigration law and proving that someone is a family member.”
Mass chain-migration will follow as family members of settled migrants in Ireland could unite with their relatives arguing their relationship is durable, thus meeting the criteria for family reunification.
Indeed, migrants who entered an unorthodox marriage outside Ireland could also demand their relationship be afforded family status.
As immigration grows as the No. 1 concern facing Irish voters, the referendum, if passed, will exacerbate the issue.
Holding the vote on International Women’s Day presents a façade that the changes will somehow benefit women.
Heading for the chopping block is the Constitution’s Article 41.2, which states: “The State shall . . . endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.”
The previous section mentions that “the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.”
This article has been described by several activist groups in Ireland as “sexist, stereotypical language” as they claim it imprisons women in the home.
As such, the “women in the home” narrative has grown, with some implying a repeal of this section would be a win for feminism.
That couldn’t be further from the truth.
In many ways, the article, as it stands, is quite progressive as it provides safeguards for mothers who may feel compelled by economic circumstances to work part time outside the home.
This section was used to amend the income-tax code that was previously discriminatory against mothers.
Modern corporate bodies abhor the one-income household, and feminists are now lining up to eliminate economic protections for women.
In Ireland more than 90% of stay-at-home parents are women.
Polling indicates the vast majority of women prefer to stay at home during their child’s formative years.
The Constitution simply acknowledges the reality for many families.
The idea that it confines women to the home is abject nonsense.
Ireland has already had two female presidents and the female labor participation rate is almost 60%.
But while Ireland seeks to legislate for so-called misinformation under a draconian hate-speech bill, several politicians including the prime minister have repeated the “women in the home” mistruth.
This isn’t the first time the Irish government has sought to remove the word “woman.”
Back in 2020, Ireland’s government-run Health Service Executive caused controversy by replacing “woman” in its booklet on cervical-check information with “people with a cervix.”
The referendum will simply continue the trend of discarding women in the name of progressivism.
Polling indicates the vote will pass comfortably.
But recent misgivings over the proposed changes could prove a spanner in the works for that one amendment.
This is a monumental shift in liberal democracy.
How long until a radical redefinition of family or a complete devaluing of the role mothers play in a child’s life spreads to other Western democracies such as the United States?
Theo McDonald is based in Dublin and writes about economic and social issues.
This story originally appeared on NYPost
