Sir, – In reply to Maria O’Brien’s letter (November 29th), while I agree with her views on the gender discrimination of marriage bar legislation, I believe she has missed the main point of my letter (November 28th) and is in danger of hitting the wrong target here.
Earlier this year a constitutional referendum was held, the purpose for which was to remove the guarantee that mothers should not, by economic circumstances, be forced out to work. This referendum arose after many years of political inaction by successive governments, which finally feared that legal action in the courts could arise over their failure to act on the guarantee. Much political spin was put by them on the matter, in an effort to convince voters that it was an anachronism and an insult to today’s women. They got their answer when 73.93 per cent of the voters shot it down, the greatest ever percentage defeat in a constitutional referendum in this State.
The real target of our ire should be those politicians who, notwithstanding that massive defeat at the ballot box, have since then put nothing in their manifestos to rectify the situation.
If mothers were supported financially by the State, they could still decide to send their children to creches and go out to work, but the option would still be there to stay at home until their children reach school-going age.
Prof Donal O’ Shea: ‘The positioning of Ronald McDonald House at the entrance to the new children’s hospital makes me angry’
Malachy Clerkin: Whatever happens tonight, Na Fianna will celebrate it. What else would we do?
Designer Helen James: I was teased at school about being English, a Protestant. There was always something of the ‘other’ about me
Sports Books of the Year: Conor Niland’s The Racket the best in a year dominated by autobiographies
It seems to me to be of little purpose to have a gender war pitting spouse against spouse and mothers against fathers here on the issue. It only serves to divide against a common enemy. – Yours, etc,
BOBBY CARTY,
Templeogue,
Dublin 6W.