I was happy to learn that the Irish High Court has decided to stand by the institution of marriage and rejected an application for recognition of gay "marriage".
I am referring to the case of an Irish couple who took a case in the High Court in order to get their foreign same sex "marriage" recognised, I blogged this story before.
Katharine Zappone and Ann Louise Gilligan said that failure to recognise their marriage breached their rights. The two were "married" in 2003 in British Columbia, Canada, after that province legalised same-sex marriage.
The couple had argued that failure to recognise their "marriage" breached their rights under Bunreacht Na hÉireann and the European Convention on Human Rights.
The High Court ruled that the court was being asked to redefine marriage to mean something which it had never done.
"I do not think that it is a right which exists for same sex couples either under the Irish constitution or under the European Convention," said Justice Elizabeth Dunne
According to Ms Zappone "We took the case because we believed and we requested that the human right to marry is simply extended to us."
That is not the case at all, they are free to marry just not each other.
If they feel that they should be recognised as a married couple then they better return to Canada.
I have no problem with civil partnership, which I feel should be extended to all couples who want it on this island, regardless of sexuality.
My objection to gay "marriage" is, as most of you will be aware of, because of my religious beliefs. I believe marriage to be a religious institution and one which must be protected.
Gay couples are entitled to equal treatment under the law but marriage is a case for the various religions, government has no place interfering in religious affairs.
NB: It seems I am going against the party line on this one, oh well!
I agree with Aengus that we need civil partnership but that is not the same as gay marriage, a very different beast indeed.