Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

1207208210212213246

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,597 ✭✭✭gctest50


    ELM327 wrote: »
    And were over since the referendum! :)

    Be over quicker when some of the young athletes hanging around the streets learn the protesters have Go-Pros cameras hanging off them

    ......and they'd be deaadly craic for making swimming n underwater videos in Ibiza next year


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    ELM327 wrote: »
    And were over since the referendum! :)

    Well these prospective clinic/surgery protestors would be the equivalent of Japenese soldiers holding out on Pacific islands long after WW2 was over. What remains to be seen is whether the great majority of militant pro-lifers recognise this and decide, on mature reflection, not to bother their arses...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,597 ✭✭✭gctest50


    Those protesters will be like the tourist in trainspotting :





  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,807 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    iguana wrote: »
    Has there been any ruling on the High Court actions? I have been away for a few days and this is the most recent news I can find on them.

    HC judgments on the petitions due at 2pm today.
    https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/judge-to-rule-on-bids-to-challenge-abortion-referendum-result-tomorrow-856331.html


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,109 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    Great. Hopefully this will stop the idiocy and bring an end to the last bastion of the pro birthers once and for all.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,917 ✭✭✭✭iguana


    Doesn't seem to be any news on this yet?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,637 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    iguana wrote: »
    Doesn't seem to be any news on this yet?
    Has anyone found the 'announcement at 2p.m.' on any other site than the examiner?

    No news I can find. Not on RTE, you would think they'd be on this...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    Igotadose wrote: »
    Has anyone found the 'announcement at 2p.m.' on any other site than the examiner?

    No news I can find. Not on RTE, you would think they'd be on this...

    Breaking News also said 2pm today. As does the Irish Times.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    one rejected anyway.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,917 ✭✭✭✭iguana


    Both rejected but they are likely to appeal. Appeal ruling on the 27th.
    http://www.thejournal.ie/eighth-referendum-challenges-4138424-Jul2018/


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,109 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    Can we not just end this ridiculousness.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    Not too much longer. Be grand.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,390 ✭✭✭Bredabe


    I was reminded by a post on FB that I don't know what happened in NI after that Mp asked for the law to be extended to there. I heard that had a protest march lately so I assume it didn't happen. Would anyone let me know what happened between the two events?

    *I can't find anything online and I don't want to spark off another sjw event by asking the girls.

    "Have you ever wagged your tail so hard you fell over"?-Brod Higgins.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,941 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    iguana wrote: »
    Both rejected but they are likely to appeal. Appeal ruling on the 27th.
    http://www.thejournal.ie/eighth-referendum-challenges-4138424-Jul2018/

    Yer wan jordan is the bitterest nimby in the country


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    Bredabe wrote: »
    I was reminded by a post on FB that I don't know what happened in NI after that Mp asked for the law to be extended to there. I heard that had a protest march lately so I assume it didn't happen. Would anyone let me know what happened between the two events?

    It'd require primary legislation, so this isn't something that would have happened at the drop of a hat. And there was no abortion legislation on the parliamentary timetable, either.

    One theory is that this might be enacted by amendment to the Domestic Abuse Bill. But I believe that was being consulted on until relatively recently, and I don't think it's even had a first reading at Westminster.

    (This is all google-grade research, so if anyone knows better, please get their speak in and I'll shut up.)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,643 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    It'd require primary legislation, so this isn't something that would have happened at the drop of a hat. And there was no abortion legislation on the parliamentary timetable, either.

    One theory is that this might be enacted by amendment to the Domestic Abuse Bill. But I believe that was being consulted on until relatively recently, and I don't think it's even had a first reading at Westminster.

    (This is all google-grade research, so if anyone knows better, please get their speak in and I'll shut up.)

    The problem in NI is that we have no government. Stormont is suspended and Westminster is only care taking, so a controversial change like bringing in abortion is the last thing the Tories want to get involved in - and then there's the little matter of the religious, anti abortion, NI party they are in coalition with.

    If Stormont hadn't collapsed I have no doubt we'd be well on our way to changing the law, and possibly now preparing to align ourselves at least with Ireland's 12 weeks if not the UK's 24 weeks.

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    volchitsa wrote: »

    If Stormont hadn't collapsed I have no doubt we'd be well on our way to changing the law, and possibly now preparing to align ourselves at least with Ireland's 12 weeks if not the UK's 24 weeks.

    But do the DUP not effectively have a veto on progress one way or another?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    volchitsa wrote: »
    The problem in NI is that we have no government. Stormont is suspended and Westminster is only care taking, so a controversial change like bringing in abortion is the last thing the Tories want to get involved in - and then there's the little matter of the religious, anti abortion, NI party they are in coalition with.
    The government likely doesn't, but many Tory backbenchers do, and lots more in the opposition. So if it's added as an opposition amendment, the gov. is in a very awks position either way.

    The theory is that one doesn't "undevolve" abortion for NI as such, or bring in a new one-off NI-specific law, one that just repeals existing UK-wide legislation. Then Stormont would have to a) manage to actually sit, then b) get a majority to pass local abortion legislation, and indeed c) not have it fall to a petition of concern.
    But do the DUP not effectively have a veto on progress one way or another?

    In Westminster, they're in a situation of Electoral Chicken with the Tories. Which of them is the more scared of a general election? But if abortion legislation comes in on a cross-party party basis, rather than being government business as such, it seems an especially tough call for the DUP to pull the rug and bring the whole thing down, when it's not even in their confidence and supply agreement. Maybe they just complain lots, and get bunged a few more million.

    In Stormont, they'd have get some support from other MLA to manage a Petition of Concern. Which they might be able to do.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,223 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    But do the DUP not effectively have a veto on progress one way or another?

    Maybe not for long with Paisley Junior is possibly forced to resign

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,542 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    The government likely doesn't, but many Tory backbenchers do, and lots more in the opposition. So if it's added as an opposition amendment, the gov. is in a very awks position either way.

    The theory is that one doesn't "undevolve" abortion for NI as such, or bring in a new one-off NI-specific law, one that just repeals existing UK-wide legislation. Then Stormont would have to a) manage to actually sit, then b) get a majority to pass local abortion legislation, and indeed c) not have it fall to a petition of concern.



    In Westminster, they're in a situation of Electoral Chicken with the Tories. Which of them is the more scared of a general election? But if abortion legislation comes in on a cross-party party basis, rather than being government business as such, it seems an especially tough call for the DUP to pull the rug and bring the whole thing down, when it's not even in their confidence and supply agreement. Maybe they just complain lots, and get bunged a few more million.

    In Stormont, they'd have get some support from other MLA to manage a Petition of Concern. Which they might be able to do.

    The DUP have a habit of quietly backing down on their NEVER NEVER redlines if it doesn't suit them.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    The DUP have a habit of quietly backing down on their NEVER NEVER redlines if it doesn't suit them.

    But in a bad way, of course. Whereas as and when SF do the very same thing, it's because they're courageous visionary peacemakers.

    Maybe we'd be in a better place overall if we'd more "quietly backing down", and less attempts to dance on political graves when people do so.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,542 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    But in a bad way, of course. Whereas as and when SF do the very same thing, it's because they're courageous visionary peacemakers.

    Maybe we'd be in a better place overall if we'd more "quietly backing down", and less attempts to dance on political graves when people do so.

    SF don't routinely block rights though, as far as I can see.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    The DUP have a habit of quietly backing down on their NEVER NEVER redlines if it doesn't suit them.

    well this is the thing, I'm sure the sharper tools among them realise their stance on the issue can only lose them votes in the long run. So it would probably be in their interests to see the law liberalised while protesting loudly as it happens...
    So what they comes down to a question of what the balance is in the party between 'sincere' pro-lifery and cyncial gombeenism. I think I have a fair idea what that balance is within FF down here but I'm not so up to speed with our friends in the north....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    SF don't routinely block rights though, as far as I can see.

    Oh, well, that's all right then, as we all agree what "rights" should be, and-- no, wait.

    As it happens I agree with SF on all the issues involved (well, 2.75 out of 3, at least). But if you've been paying the slightest bit of attention to the last two referendum campaigns here, you should have noticed that almost any issue can be, and indeed is, framed as opposed, competing rights.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    Bredabe wrote: »
    I was reminded by a post on FB that I don't know what happened in NI after that Mp asked for the law to be extended to there. I heard that had a protest march lately so I assume it didn't happen. Would anyone let me know what happened between the two events.

    Stella Creasy was on the BBC this morning being interviewed about this. Didn't say anything about when and how it might come up in parliament, but did reiterate that her approach would be to repeal two sections of the Offences Against The Person Act, across the whole of the UK. (Only recently repealed here too, of course, by the POLDPA.)

    Another indication of the potential difficulty here for the government, and indeed for the DUP. The presenter asked a question in passing about this of another guest, Nadine Dorries. Not only is she a Tory, she'd be seen as being firmly on the "anti-abortion social conservative headbanger" wing of the party -- wants lower term limits, restrictions on grounds, etc. But even she indicated that in "early pregnancy", it should be down to the woman's choice.

    (Short item on RTE radio news about this right now, incidentally.)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,542 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    Oh, well, that's all right then, as we all agree what "rights" should be, and-- no, wait.

    As it happens I agree with SF on all the issues involved (well, 2.75 out of 3, at least). But if you've been paying the slightest bit of attention to the last two referendum campaigns here, you should have noticed that almost any issue can be, and indeed is, framed as opposed, competing rights.

    You compared SF and the DUP on the subject of rights, there is no comparison frankly and the sooner people stop making one that isn't there the better.

    The DUP need to be isolated as the blockers of an equal society here.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    You compared SF and the DUP on the subject of rights, there is no comparison frankly and the sooner people stop making one that isn't there the better.
    No, you made that comparison. In attempt to shore up your initial claim about how the DUP were simultaneously intransigent, but weak and cowardly. I merely offered the observation that if SF did the same -- and they regularly do -- that'd be respectively principled, and going the extra mile for pluralism.
    The DUP need to be isolated as the blockers of an equal society here.

    This thread needs to be shared your usual worst possible spin on unionism, shameless apologia for republicanism routine, when it adds nothing at all to the issue at hand.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,542 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    No, you made that comparison. In attempt to shore up your initial claim about how the DUP were simultaneously intransigent, but weak and cowardly. I merely offered the observation that if SF did the same -- and they regularly do -- that'd be respectively principled, and going the extra mile for pluralism.



    This thread needs to be shared your usual worst possible spin on unionism, shameless apologia for republicanism routine, when it adds nothing at all to the issue at hand.

    And where do SF block rights?

    You were wondering what the DUP might do viz a viz abortion. I offered my opinion based on past behaviour as to what they might do. But you couldn't resist lumping a go at SF in there too. :rolleyes:

    *We equally know the tired agenda to portray everyone in the north as 'the same'.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    And where do SF block rights?
    I'm not repeating myself on a tangent I've more than covered already.
    You were wondering what the DUP might do viz a viz abortion. I offered my opinion based on past behaviour as to what they might do. But you couldn't resist lumping a go at SF in there too. :rolleyes:

    You didn't so much offer your opinion as to what they'd do, as slag them off in advance for backing down. While covering yourself by simultaneously slagging them off if they stick to "NEVER NEVER".

    As I already pointed out, I'm not at all critical of SF on this -- other than being slow reproductive rights learners, but not as slow as the other three main single-community parties. I mention them only in the light of the hilarity of how you would gloss SF "quietly backing down", or sticking to their "NEVER NEVER redlines".

    It's pretty much your single transferable post.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    being slow reproductive rights learners.

    I could never understand how SF could get away with their position on this issue while posing as a left-wing party. I guess no-one else in the North was making an issue of it, bar fringe Trotskyists etc. Bit surprising that their competitors for the left vote in the Republic didn't bring it up more in recent years though...


Advertisement