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

How long before Irish reunification?

Options
1…144145147149150…335

Comments

  • Options
    #4382
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 68,129 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    markodaly wrote: »
    Ironic, seeing as there was plenty of sectarian violence in the north long before parition.

    Partition just gave it an offical venner.

    It was a countrywide problem and a 'little' bit of a problem across Europe.

    Partition concentrated it here and gave one religion the power to suppress the other until we all seen it go up in flames.


  • Options
    #4383
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    20-30 years
    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    That’s why they’ll be hold on the same day.

    If it were at different times the outcome could be rendered moot by conflicting results.


    Speaking of nonsense


    What?

    If the North votes against a UI, what would be the point of a vote in the ROI?

    The consent of the population of the North is the trigger here.

    It makes no sense to do it on the same day.


  • Options
    #4384
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,438 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    Thanks buddeh. (this one time)

    ---

    Also the SoS won't make a negative decision and put a timeline on the next vote. They can only decide in the positive, ie. "We should hold a vote because of the circumstance". That could well happen in about 20 years after the first one, but that's not how it would come about. But your sentimetn is probably correct.

    I'll accept a thanks from a fellow Dub anytime. :)


  • Options
    #4385
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    20-30 years
    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    And I don’t think you know what concurrently means

    I don't think you got why I highlighted it.

    Our permission for a UI could well have already been given and was implicit in our acceptance and overwhelming support of the GFA.

    We are waiting on the North to change their status.


  • Options
    #4386
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    BonnieSituation wrote: »

    The whole State is built upon eventual reunification.

    Was built but no longer the case. The republic as part of the GFA changed its constitution in that respect.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4387
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    20-30 years
    blanch152 wrote: »
    I'll accept a thanks from a fellow Dub anytime. :)

    Ha. It's a long time til the league and trip to Tyrone!


  • Options
    #4388
    dd973
    Registered Users Posts: 625 ✭✭✭dd973


    20-30 years
    Optimistically, my guess is 20-30 years based on demographic trends, it'll be slow, organic and when it eventually does happen people will feel a sense of relief and wonder what the fuss was all about.


  • Options
    #4389
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    'Forcing' people to change rarely works.

    Invest properly in 'choice' is a much better way forward in a religiously sensitive environment.

    Driving people into cul de sacs is totally the wrong way to go.

    And BTW, nobody suggested religiously controlled schools are a good idea, they are generally a bad idea anywhere IMO, as I am not religious.

    You are begininng to sound like George Wallace.


  • Options
    #4390
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    20-30 years
    markodaly wrote: »
    Was built but no longer the case. The republic as part of the GFA changed its constitution in that respect.

    People need to start reading the document. Changes to A2 and 3 were sops to Unionists. What we have instead is a concrete pathway.


  • Options
    #4391
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    It was a countrywide problem and a 'little' bit of a problem across Europe.

    Partition concentrated it here and gave one religion the power to suppress the other until we all seen it go up in flames.

    Partition was then the answer to stop an all out all Ireland civil war. People forget that little tidbit as well.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4392
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 68,129 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    markodaly wrote: »
    You are begininng to sound like George Wallace.

    As Dytalus reasonably and sensibly pointed out a long time ago, religious control of schools bears no resemblance to the apartheid state of America. People send their children to schools voluntarily here and nobody is 'forced' to go to a certain school. It cheapens the debate here to keep making the comparison.


  • Options
    #4393
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    20-30 years
    markodaly wrote: »
    Partition was then the answer to stop an all out all Ireland civil war. People forget that little tidbit as well.

    Instead of the Civil War we got?:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #4394
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    People need to start reading the document. Changes to A2 and 3 were sops to Unionists. What we have instead is a concrete pathway.

    Yes, so how then is our 'entire state', built around unifcation?
    It isn't. We are decades away from it.


  • Options
    #4395
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 68,129 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    markodaly wrote: »
    Partition was then the answer to stop an all out all Ireland civil war. People forget that little tidbit as well.

    Partition was chosen because Unionists raised a private army and threatened the state who capitulated to them. Let's get it right.


  • Options
    #4396
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    30-40 years
    As a secularist and fanatical agnostic, I think some of us are overestimating the impact of religion in the north - people there are equally irreligious. It's the long trail of history that divides people not their religion, or lack thereof.


  • Options
    #4397
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    20-30 years
    markodaly wrote: »
    Yes, so how then is our 'entire state', built around unifcation?
    It isn't. We are decades away from it.

    Ah Jesus. Good luck.


  • Options
    #4398
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    Instead of the Civil War we got?:rolleyes:

    A teddy bears picnic compared to the one we avoided.

    Are you seriously saying that if there was no partition in the Anglo-Irish treaty of 1921 that Northern Unionists would have stood idly by? You do recall the Ulster Covenant of 1912?


  • Options
    #4399
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    Ah Jesus. Good luck.

    No, you made the claim, elaborate.

    How is our entire state built for reunifcation?


  • Options
    #4400
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    As a secularist and fanatical agnostic, I think some of us are overestimating the impact of religion in the north - people there are equally irreligious. It's the long trail of history that divides people not their religion, or lack thereof.

    It is not a question of 'religion' per say, it is a question of creating a social mix, making friends, marrying into the 'other side'.

    As I mentioned, the evidence is very very clear on this. Endogamy is a serious issue there. Segregated schools are a huge contribution to this, thus needs to be tackled, never mind the cost of essentially maintaining loads of schools to preserve the status quo.


  • Options
    #4401
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 68,129 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    markodaly wrote: »
    It is not a question of 'religion' per say, it is a question of creating a social mix, making friends, marrying into the 'other side'.

    As I mentioned, the evidence is very very clear on this. Endogamy is a serious issue there. Segregated schools are a huge contribution to this, thus needs to be tackled, never mind the cost of essentially maintaining loads of schools to preserve the status quo.

    Nobody is saying it is NOT a problem nor is anyone saying that it shouldn't be tackled.

    Tackling it with 'force' is not however the way to do it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4402
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    As Dytalus reasonably and sensibly pointed out a long time ago, religious control of schools bears no resemblance to the apartheid state of America. People send their children to schools voluntarily here and nobody is 'forced' to go to a certain school. It cheapens the debate here to keep making the comparison.

    So, you want to ignore the academic evidence that says other wise.

    Fine.


  • Options
    #4403
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Nobody is saying it is NOT a problem nor is anyone saying that it shouldn't be tackled.

    Tackling it with 'force' is not however the way to do it.

    Take away state funding and back the IEF (Integrated Education Fund). Job done
    https://www.ief.org.uk/

    They can still go to their religious school but either the church will have to stump up the cash, or they will. Simple. It will be unpopular with the people wanting to keep the sectarian status quo but fcuk them


  • Options
    #4404
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    30-40 years
    markodaly wrote: »
    How is our entire state built for reunifcation?

    The vision for this state was formed on an all Ireland polity, the territorial claim to the north was codified in the constitution from the start and remains there albiet watered down.

    It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island

    Not could, not may, not might be, but shall. You think that word wasn't chosen carefully?

    495661.png

    Our national flag symbolises this desire to unite and, despite predating partition, was adopted without equivocation as the flag of the state... and so on, and so on.


  • Options
    #4405
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    20-30 years
    markodaly wrote: »
    A teddy bears picnic compared to the one we avoided.

    Are you seriously saying that if there was no partition in the Angle-Irish treaty of 1921 that Northern Unionists would have stood idly by? You do recall the Ulster Covenant of 1912?

    How do you even begin with such an incredible statement?

    I mean, thank God the Civil War, after a War of Independence, a World War and a Rising wasn't that bad I guess...

    We might have had to deal with Craig and the Boys.


  • Options
    #4406
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    20-30 years
    markodaly wrote: »
    No, you made the claim, elaborate.

    How is our entire state built for reunifcation?

    JT thankfully has answered ably. Now try not to get all obtuse. Again.


  • Options
    #4407
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 68,129 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    markodaly wrote: »
    Take away state funding and back the IEF (Integrated Education Fund). Job done
    https://www.ief.org.uk/

    They can still go to their religious school but either the church will have to stump up the cash, or they will. Simple. It will be unpopular with the people wanting to keep the sectarian status quo but fcuk them
    but fcuk them[

    That oppressive, force attitude again. Second time from two different posters.

    You clearly didn't read the whole article that you posted and cherrypicked a bit out of. If you had, you would have seen examples of parents and communities voting for integration when given the choice and encouragement.


  • Options
    #4408
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    20-30 years
    markodaly wrote: »
    Take away state funding and back the IEF (Integrated Education Fund). Job done
    https://www.ief.org.uk/

    They can still go to their religious school but either the church will have to stump up the cash, or they will. Simple. It will be unpopular with the people wanting to keep the sectarian status quo but fcuk them

    Or... maybe look to change patronage in an organised and localised manner as is done in the South. Giving people buy-in always works.


  • Options
    #4409
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,438 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Nobody is saying it is NOT a problem nor is anyone saying that it shouldn't be tackled.

    Tackling it with 'force' is not however the way to do it.


    Unfortunately, people aren't ready for change in Northern Ireland. The two sectarian parties - SF and DUP - still get the highest vote from their communities. We can keep maintaining that status quo, or we can start doing something to change it. Education is key.

    People who vote for Sinn Fein don't actually realise how they are viewed by the other community, how having former terrorists within their ranks is unnecessarily provocative and deeply hurtful to unionists. We see it all the time on here because we have many people who defend Sinn Fein even if they don't support them. In reality, they are a divisive party, just like the DUP.

    I have not suggested forcing anyone to change school. What I have suggested is a mirroring of the process taking place in the South, where schools are being divested of Catholic patronage and others are taking up the slack. I am proposing that it happen at a faster pace and with more urgency, and yes, compulsorily, in the North, because of the unique challenges that that sectarian state faces. I make no apologies for that, because either you are interested in solving the problem or you are interested in waiting for some demographic dividend in twenty years time, which was predicted to happen twenty years ago.


  • Options
    #4410
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    The vision for this state was formed on an all Ireland polity, the territorial claim to the north was codified in the constitution from the start and remains there albiet watered down.

    Hmmm, for some keen to tell us all the real facts, this is really really streching it.
    It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island

    Not a territorial claim at all, but more of a long term aspiration through peaceful, democratic means. I guess its one for the international lawyers to look over.
    Our national flag symbolises this desire to unite and, despite predating partition, was adopted without equivocation as the flag of the state... and so on, and so on.

    Come off it, you have to do better than that.
    The Union Jack incorporates St. Patricks cross as a recogintion of Ireland/Northern Ireland as part of the Union.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4411
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,222 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    How do you even begin with such an incredible statement?

    I mean, thank God the Civil War, after a War of Independence, a World War and a Rising wasn't that bad I guess...

    We might have had to deal with Craig and the Boys.

    I see you avoided the quesiton, so please do tell us.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement