And so, the Civil Partnership Bill has finally been passed, 21 years after Denmark led the way. Only last week, Denmark started allowing civil partners to adopt jointly. Despite Denmark's civil partnership legislation's avoidance of the word marriage, it is, as in other countries like the UK, basically equivalent to marriage. Unlike, sadly, Ireland's new law.

I found the progress through the Oireachtas to be fascinating and, at times, moving, and I was full of conflicted feelings when it completed its passage. Mostly, a grudging acknowledgment that we have taken a big step forward as a society. It will make it much easier, down the line, to introduce equality, once Irish people have got used to dealing with the reality of the institution of partnership.
Thanks to the excellent oireachtas.ie website, I had the Seanad debate on the bill playing loud on loudspeakers one evening, late into the night, as I was pottering around, and the high quality of the debate struck me. Although it was at times fractious and petty, in the main there was a genuine effort to get to grips with the fundamentals of the complex issues involved. I even enjoyed the slithering Jesuitical disingenuousness of Senator Rónán Mullen, precisely because the Catholic morality he so eloquently espouses is no longer the dominant ethos of this state. Here he is expressing mock-surprise, protesting in the Senate: "there is a world of distinction between having opposition, hostility or disregard to gay and lesbian couples and having a moral view on public recognition for same-sex relationships." He may view himself as a decent and kind man, and indeed he may well be, but from the perspective of gays and lesbians, that "world of distinction" is non-existent. One judges morals and laws not by the avowed intent, but by the effect.
I can't express enough the relief I feel that church and state are no longer synonymous; only 4 members of the Oireachtas voted against this Bill. What's harder to communicate now, especially to younger people, is the way that hard, cruel laws, mirroring an intolerant and discriminatory society, used to be defended with the same pained, unctuous tones as Mullen's, with an awful undertone of hatred – or, more accurately, a cleverly defended, wilful indifference to the hateful effects their moral positions had on the most vulnerable in society: children, women, and LGBT people. Give me a thundering Protestant Pastor threatening hellfire and brimstone any day, for at least you know where you stand with him. But Catholic morality in Ireland has always been expressed in this pious way, the iron fist of the law wrapped in the velvet glove of a so-called compassionate morality. Thankfully, mercifully, eventually, the fist of temporal, political power has been removed.
What really surprised me, however, was the intelligence and sense of Minister Dermot Ahern. Each time he responded to an amendment, he argued coherently and with a full grasp of the matter. I may disagree passionately with the fundamental decision at the core of this Bill, to avoid constitutional issues, to ensure that Civil Partnerships do not mimic the hallowed Constitutional Family. The absence of protection of children's rights in this bill is a disgrace. But, the government having made that decision, the Minister followed the logic through, with a compassion and reasonableness that was impressive. Most particularly, his language and tone was refreshing, clear, and unambiguous. He stood firm against the silver-tongued rhetoric of the Catholic brigade, and this is his comment on modern Ireland:
Dermot Ahern: "Twenty years ago this was a mono-ethnic, mono-cultural and virtually mono-religious society. Today, it is multicultural, multi-ethnic and multi-religious and includes those with no religion. That is why we, as legislators, cannot legislate for one concept of morality; we have to legislate for the common good as best we can. We will not always succeed because there will be people who will be adversely affected by the legislation we bring forward. However, when the vast majority of the elected Members of both Houses agree with the principles laid down in this legislation, I do not support the effort made to chip away at the principle of treating people with fairness and equality."
It has to be acknowledged that, for all the prejudices I may have, it has been two Fianna Fáil Ministers, Ahern and Geoghegan-Quinn, who have driven progressive legislation on gay rights through in this land. If Ahern's hand was forced by the Greens, he showed no signs of it, and indeed seemed to be proud of what he has achieved.
My hero in the Senate debate on this Bill is of course David Norris. Time and time again, in the thirty years since I first encountered him in the Hirschfeld Centre and followed his brave and personally costly battle in the High Court to challenge the criminal law that applied against us, I have found him to be the epitome of independent, shrewd, and passionate integrity. In his stand against the Bill, because it ignores children and because it enshrines inequality, I fell in love with him all over again. I can see why in the end he voted for it – after all, he'd be in very strange company if he voted Níl, and he had been so powerfully eloquent in the debates on its shortcomings. But he is so consistently honest and principled and entertaining that I believe Ireland would be mad not to elect him president next year.