manus
Tax-individualisation bullies home-makers into the workforce. It means that many homes have no earned income whilst others reluctantly hold two jobs to avoid a tax-hike.
Children have been hit hard in recent budgets. Child benefit has been reduced twice, resource teachers have been withdrawn, class sizes have been increased. These cutbacks undermine their educational possibilities, and therefore our hopes for the future.
Attempts to equate same-sex unions and sexual co-habitation with marriage cheapens the commitment of those who marry and raise children. Extending the financial benefits of marriage to those who don't want it and to those whose sexual practice means that they cannot have children in the normal way, necessarily limits the financial assistance through tax-benefits etc that can be given to traditional families upon which we depend to provide us with the next generation of tax-payers, volunteers, carers, and decision-makers.
It is NOT the role of the State to legislate for the private relationships of adults.
The only valid reason for giving state benefits to people because of their personal relationships is if those relationships contribute to the common good. There is overwhelming evidence internationally that children fare best when raised by their biological parents who themselves are in a lifelong marital commitment to each other. There are children raised in traditional families who don't do well. There are children who grow up in the most dysfunctional circumstances imaginable, only to become enormous assets to society. However, children statistically do better from living with their biological parents, when those parents are married to each other. This is the reason why marriage deserves special support.
Likewise the relationship between small children and their caring parents deserves special support. It is the benefit to society as a whole, not whether someone is in a caring committed relationship which justifies public support.
Why should the lonely be the only ones having to carry the weight of a full tax-burden?
If you do want civil partnerships, what's the justification in excluding those who aren't having a sexual relationship? There isn't any.
Copy and paste the below link in your browser to learn more.
http://www.ionainstitute.ie/assets/files/MADE%20FOR%20CHILDREN_web.pdf
Children have been hit hard in recent budgets. Child benefit has been reduced twice, resource teachers have been withdrawn, class sizes have been increased. These cutbacks undermine their educational possibilities, and therefore our hopes for the future.
Attempts to equate same-sex unions and sexual co-habitation with marriage cheapens the commitment of those who marry and raise children. Extending the financial benefits of marriage to those who don't want it and to those whose sexual practice means that they cannot have children in the normal way, necessarily limits the financial assistance through tax-benefits etc that can be given to traditional families upon which we depend to provide us with the next generation of tax-payers, volunteers, carers, and decision-makers.
It is NOT the role of the State to legislate for the private relationships of adults.
The only valid reason for giving state benefits to people because of their personal relationships is if those relationships contribute to the common good. There is overwhelming evidence internationally that children fare best when raised by their biological parents who themselves are in a lifelong marital commitment to each other. There are children raised in traditional families who don't do well. There are children who grow up in the most dysfunctional circumstances imaginable, only to become enormous assets to society. However, children statistically do better from living with their biological parents, when those parents are married to each other. This is the reason why marriage deserves special support.
Likewise the relationship between small children and their caring parents deserves special support. It is the benefit to society as a whole, not whether someone is in a caring committed relationship which justifies public support.
Why should the lonely be the only ones having to carry the weight of a full tax-burden?
If you do want civil partnerships, what's the justification in excluding those who aren't having a sexual relationship? There isn't any.
Copy and paste the below link in your browser to learn more.
http://www.ionainstitute.ie/assets/files/MADE%20FOR%20CHILDREN_web.pdf
