A Little Pony wrote: » Not particularly no as I have expressed my views on these issues before. I would allow gay marriage to pass but that is just me personally. I wouldn't want to pay for a ILA.
A Little Pony wrote: » Stormont is not coming back unless Ulster Scots and Irish language are put together in a language package, but really the system is flawed and has been doomed to fail from the start.
tomwaterford wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » Not going to happen. Neither is stormont going to stay down
A Little Pony wrote: » Not going to happen.
FrancieBrady wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » Sinn Fein voters vote in people with terrorist pasts who wouldn't think twice about putting a bullet in the back of a prods head. Welcome to the centuries conflict. But as I said I don't see these huge extreme views you speak of in everyday life. The conflict has been over a long time. Have you anything to say about the DUP constantly blocking rights available to every other person on these islands, from a religiously fundamentalist and culturally bigoted standpoint? *I consider the DUP's opinions on LGBT and same sex marriage to be fundamentalist and can post quotes from them that illustrate that if you wish. (but I would rather not spread it given a choice)
A Little Pony wrote: » Sinn Fein voters vote in people with terrorist pasts who wouldn't think twice about putting a bullet in the back of a prods head. Welcome to the centuries conflict. But as I said I don't see these huge extreme views you speak of in everyday life.
tomwaterford wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » The DUP cleaned up at the Westminster elections and had the best ever result, the result of dreams. Talking about Stormont elections now is kind of irrelevant as we probably won't ever see Stormont back up and running again, not for as long as mandatory coalition exists as it doesn't work in a functioning democracy. I am actually happy that Stormont collapsed, it wasn't working and never will work as it Joint rule from Dublin so
A Little Pony wrote: » The DUP cleaned up at the Westminster elections and had the best ever result, the result of dreams. Talking about Stormont elections now is kind of irrelevant as we probably won't ever see Stormont back up and running again, not for as long as mandatory coalition exists as it doesn't work in a functioning democracy. I am actually happy that Stormont collapsed, it wasn't working and never will work as it
tomwaterford wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » It isn't religious fundamentalism though, it is just tribal politics which is hundreds of years old. Sure you come across street preachers etc, I even had a debate with one on the existence of God etc but in everyday life I just don't see this religious fundamentalism you seem obsessed with. I have tried to finding these thousands of supremacists too. How many people here have actually tried to discuss politics with family members or people close to you? Most I know either don't care or keep it brief, it's like getting blood out of a stone. I think this fundamentalist theory people have on so many people in NI borders on a myth, I just don't see it in my everyday life. On a broader note...I'm suprised there isn't a more discussion within unionism about its future given it no longer can command a majority in stormont I know from people on fringes of dissident organisations (eirigi etc) this has caused consternation and discussion on the future and another election of similar results will cause a lot of issues to be examined more closely
A Little Pony wrote: » It isn't religious fundamentalism though, it is just tribal politics which is hundreds of years old. Sure you come across street preachers etc, I even had a debate with one on the existence of God etc but in everyday life I just don't see this religious fundamentalism you seem obsessed with. I have tried to finding these thousands of supremacists too. How many people here have actually tried to discuss politics with family members or people close to you? Most I know either don't care or keep it brief, it's like getting blood out of a stone. I think this fundamentalist theory people have on so many people in NI borders on a myth, I just don't see it in my everyday life.
FrancieBrady wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » It isn't religious fundamentalism though, it is just tribal politics which is hundreds of years old. Sure you come across street preachers etc, I even had a debate with one on the existence of God etc but in everyday life I just don't see this religious fundamentalism you seem obsessed with. I have tried to finding these thousands of supremacists too. How many people here have actually tried to discuss politics with family members or people close to you? Most I know either don't care or keep it brief, it's like getting blood out of a stone. I think this fundamentalist theory people have on so many people in NI borders on a myth, I just don't see it in my everyday life. Yes it is fundamentalist and you are avoiding the question. Here is the voting records of the DUP MPsIan Paisley Jr - North Antrim LGBT rights: Voted against equal gay rights Gay Marriage: Voted against same sex marriage Abortion: Voted against Climate change: against measures to prevent climate change Notable quotes: Called homosexuality “immoral, offensive and obnoxious” and said he was “repulsed” by gays and lesbians. Jim Shannon - Strangford LGBT rights: voted against equal gay rights Gay marriage: Voted against same sex marriage Abortion: Voted against Climate change: Voted a mixture of for and against measures to prevent climate change (5 votes for, 7 votes against) Sammy Wilson - East Antrim LGBT rights: Voted against equal gay rights Gay marriage: Voted against same sex marriage Abortion: Voted against Climate change: Generally against measures to prevent climate change (1 vote for, 13 votes against) Notable quotes: Believes man-made climate change is a “gigantic con” and an “hysterical semi-religion” Gregory Campbell - East Londonderry LGBT rights: Voted against equal gay rights Gay marriage: Voted against same sex marriage Abortion: Voted against Climate change: Voted a mixture of for and against measures to prevent climate change (7 votes for, 7 votes against) Notable quotes: Confirmed that the DUP is “unashamedly pro-life.” Nigel Dodds - Belfast North LGBT rights: Voted against equal gay rights (1 vote for, 14 votes against) Gay marriage: Voted against same sex marriage (1 vote for, 6 votes against) Abortion: Voted against Climate change: Voted for a mixture (8 votes for, 5 votes against) David Simpson - Upper Bann LGBT rights: Voted against equal gay rights Gay marriage: Voted against same sex marriage Abortion: Voted against Climate change: Voted a mixture for and against measures to prevent climate change (6 votes for, 7 votes against) Notable quotes: Called for change in British abortion law, to make it more like Northern Irish law and criticised pro-choice MPs for their “anti-democratic, anti-human rights stance.” Gavin Robinson - Belfast East Has never voted on laws to promote equality and human rights Abortion: Voted once with the pro-life lobby Climate change: Voted for measures to prevent climate change (4 votes vor, 3 against) Emma Little-Pengelly - Belfast South LGBT rights: Newly elected – yet to vote Gay marriage: Newly elected – yet to vote Abortion: Voted against: Newly elected – yet to vote Climate change: Newly elected – yet to vote Paul Girvan - South Antrim LGBT rights: Newly elected – yet to vote Gay marriage: Newly elected – yet to vote Abortion: Voted against: Newly elected – yet to vote Climate change: Newly elected – yet to vote Jeffrey M. Donaldson - Lagan Valley LGBT rights: Voted against equal gay rights (1 vote for, 13 votes against) Gay marriage: Voted against same sex marriage Abortion: voted against Climate change: A mixture (9 votes for, 5 votes against) Unionists elect these people knowing they will continue to vote on religious beliefs and cultural suprematist beliefs. The record doesn't lie or deflect from reality.
Irishweather wrote: » And this won't be destructive for the Peace Process? Lol! Cloud Cuckoo land!https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/irish-want-sea-border-with-uk-after-brexit-lvb6n35fq
FrancieBrady wrote: » Irishweather wrote: » And this won't be destructive for the Peace Process? Lol! Cloud Cuckoo land!https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/irish-want-sea-border-with-uk-after-brexit-lvb6n35fq What? It wasn't Dublin that campaigned for Brexit. We have to find the best accommodation for us. How would that destroy the peace process?
DUP MP Ian Paisley said the reported position of the Irish Government appeared to leave two alternatives - a "very hard border" or that "Ireland will wise up and leave the EU" itself.
blanch152 wrote: » FrancieBrady wrote: » You will have to show me how I 'disregarded' your argument. I have taken your argument on and countered it: And I specifically didn't call you a 'partitionist' I said your attitude was 'closer to a partitionist' than a nationalist for the reason outlined above. I wouldn't worry too much, I get called/labelled a 'member of SF' and a 'supporter of terrorists' all the time by some here when I am neither. Could you answer some of the questions now? A partitionist is a term of abuse, not a political label.
FrancieBrady wrote: » You will have to show me how I 'disregarded' your argument. I have taken your argument on and countered it: And I specifically didn't call you a 'partitionist' I said your attitude was 'closer to a partitionist' than a nationalist for the reason outlined above. I wouldn't worry too much, I get called/labelled a 'member of SF' and a 'supporter of terrorists' all the time by some here when I am neither. Could you answer some of the questions now?
FrancieBrady wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » Bizarre statements really. I have been in Orange halls plenty of times in my life, met people in the Orange, good decent people who from my experience never talked politics anytime I met them in and around the scene. Just normal every day folk. From all the people I know I don't know one person who wants Protestant supremacy over anyone, hell if anything attendance to Church and religion in general is falling rapidly within that community. I don't know one person who attends church or believes in a God be it family or friends or has any supremacy beliefs, actually family is now tied into a Catholic family because of a marriage who are actually religious. Never once have I seen any issues or anyone trying to 'rule' over them. It seems some people on this thread are stuck in a time warp believing it is 1798 or the early 20th century on here. Most on here obviously don't have a clue what daily life is like in Northern Ireland compared to what it was even 20 years ago, it's hugely different socially from my experience. I could name multiple things which are different since my time growing up in the early 90s. So why are so many rights being blocked for religiously fundamentalist reasons? As you say most Protestants are unionist and they elect the people who are doing that again and again. Yet Blanch reckons nationalists will be 'bigger' in stature if they compromise/acquiese to open religious fundamentalism.
A Little Pony wrote: » Bizarre statements really. I have been in Orange halls plenty of times in my life, met people in the Orange, good decent people who from my experience never talked politics anytime I met them in and around the scene. Just normal every day folk. From all the people I know I don't know one person who wants Protestant supremacy over anyone, hell if anything attendance to Church and religion in general is falling rapidly within that community. I don't know one person who attends church or believes in a God be it family or friends or has any supremacy beliefs, actually family is now tied into a Catholic family because of a marriage who are actually religious. Never once have I seen any issues or anyone trying to 'rule' over them. It seems some people on this thread are stuck in a time warp believing it is 1798 or the early 20th century on here. Most on here obviously don't have a clue what daily life is like in Northern Ireland compared to what it was even 20 years ago, it's hugely different socially from my experience. I could name multiple things which are different since my time growing up in the early 90s.
A Little Pony wrote: » Vast majority of Protestants in the state are Unionist. It's just a fact.
blanch152 wrote: » Look, it always helps to label and demonise your enemies. It allows you to deflect from the real issues. That is part and parcel of all tribal politics and the North has some of the most tribal politics anywhere in the world. Hence the type of accusations we see on this thread where all Unionists are lumped in with the reactionaries and called supremacists and religious fundamentalists, and realistic nationalists are called partitionists.
Thomas__ wrote: » FrancieBrady wrote: » Thomas__ wrote: » I think that there is some misunderstanding."An Irish language act will be incorporated into a Minority Languages Act, and everyone wins." Reading this quoted line, it is perceived in my view as addressing the reality in regards of how the Irish language is really used in daily live by the people in the whole of the Island of Ireland. Seen from that angle, it sounds as sustainable compromise in regards to NI. On the other hand, your argument is as well reasonable in regards of the DUP who has to stick to agreements once concluded. But I also know that the DUP can´t be trusted and that party is unreliable and ruthless imo (they´ve delivered proof for that by themselves and latest in the scandal that ended up in the break up of the past NI govt leading to new elections with a result that there isn´t still a new NI govt formed yet). Can anyone explain to me what unionism loses by allowing a standalone Language Act that has been previously agreed before the sudden interest in Ulster Scots (see the absence of any concern for U-S in Ian Paisley's objections in 2007) If you can frame what it is they lose I think you will arrive at what exactly the core of the problem is.Because in my opinion all they will 'lose' is a sense of supremacy. Your last line hits the nail on the head and this is what it is all about on their side. Nothing else and they still refuse to acknowledge that their times of "supremacy" are long gone. What can´t be solved politically, is to be tried in a court case. Question is whether the court would take it on for trial. The minds of the DUP leaders are closed for compromise, despite the fact that they are to stick to the concluded agreement, so there is perhaps no other way than to drag them to court to make them comply with with what they agreed themselves before. I know, dealing with the Dinosaurs Ulster Party is an ordeal, more so as they are the political arm of the OO and I suspect that the members of the latter are all behind that mischief. One has just recall all their demonstrations and street actions from recent years they´ve took to the streets in regards to "defend and uphold their culture".
FrancieBrady wrote: » Thomas__ wrote: » I think that there is some misunderstanding."An Irish language act will be incorporated into a Minority Languages Act, and everyone wins." Reading this quoted line, it is perceived in my view as addressing the reality in regards of how the Irish language is really used in daily live by the people in the whole of the Island of Ireland. Seen from that angle, it sounds as sustainable compromise in regards to NI. On the other hand, your argument is as well reasonable in regards of the DUP who has to stick to agreements once concluded. But I also know that the DUP can´t be trusted and that party is unreliable and ruthless imo (they´ve delivered proof for that by themselves and latest in the scandal that ended up in the break up of the past NI govt leading to new elections with a result that there isn´t still a new NI govt formed yet). Can anyone explain to me what unionism loses by allowing a standalone Language Act that has been previously agreed before the sudden interest in Ulster Scots (see the absence of any concern for U-S in Ian Paisley's objections in 2007) If you can frame what it is they lose I think you will arrive at what exactly the core of the problem is.Because in my opinion all they will 'lose' is a sense of supremacy.
Thomas__ wrote: » I think that there is some misunderstanding."An Irish language act will be incorporated into a Minority Languages Act, and everyone wins." Reading this quoted line, it is perceived in my view as addressing the reality in regards of how the Irish language is really used in daily live by the people in the whole of the Island of Ireland. Seen from that angle, it sounds as sustainable compromise in regards to NI. On the other hand, your argument is as well reasonable in regards of the DUP who has to stick to agreements once concluded. But I also know that the DUP can´t be trusted and that party is unreliable and ruthless imo (they´ve delivered proof for that by themselves and latest in the scandal that ended up in the break up of the past NI govt leading to new elections with a result that there isn´t still a new NI govt formed yet).
steddyeddy wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » The last number of pages reading back on them is really funny and full of so much fear for 'The Prod'. From where I live I don't recognize these stereotypes of Ulster Unionists. It really is bizarre. Anyone actually from NI on here? Ulster unionists are not representative of prods. They make up the vast vast minority.
A Little Pony wrote: » The last number of pages reading back on them is really funny and full of so much fear for 'The Prod'. From where I live I don't recognize these stereotypes of Ulster Unionists. It really is bizarre. Anyone actually from NI on here?
blanch152 wrote: » A partitionist is a term of abuse, not a political label.
Thomas__ wrote: » I´m with you there, one doesn´t has to be a Shinner in order to support achieving the aim of a UI.
FrancieBrady wrote: » blanch152 wrote: » There is a thread elsewhere in this forum where they talk about how political debate in the US is devalued by how people try to label others they disagree with as if this somehow adds to their argument. Here it is:http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=104202119&postcount=12 "But it's practically a national pastime in the US to segregate and pit people against one another. Slot people into little boxes. She's an African-American, bisexual, atheist, liberal, urbanite Sanders-supporter, whereas I'm an Hispanic, conservative, christian, rural Trump-supporter. You see it in their media and in online discussion all the time. Step one in any debate is to stick labels on the other guy so you know who you're up against. Everyone has labels. Which ultimately creates division, gives everyone their own unique little flag to rally under. " You could actually take that description and apply it to how many nationalists debate Northern Ireland. Not only do they rule out encompassing Unionists within a solution, they reject different views of nationalism if they are not fully in agreement with everything that SF stand for. Labelling people as partitionists or "nationalists" in inverted commas in order to disregard their argument is a handy way of avoiding uncomfortable truths. Rather than call me a partitionist, explain the alternative and how I am wrong. You will have to show me how I 'disregarded' your argument. I have taken your argument on and countered it: A united Ireland does not have to be rejected because of temporary economic cost or even a societal one if it is for the betterment of everyone in the long term. Which is the very essence of 'nationalism'. And I specifically didn't call you a 'partitionist' I said your attitude was 'closer to a partitionist' than a nationalist for the reason outlined above.I wouldn't worry too much, I get called/labelled a 'member of SF' and a 'supporter of terrorists' all the time by some here when I am neither. Could you answer some of the questions now?
blanch152 wrote: » There is a thread elsewhere in this forum where they talk about how political debate in the US is devalued by how people try to label others they disagree with as if this somehow adds to their argument. Here it is:http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=104202119&postcount=12 "But it's practically a national pastime in the US to segregate and pit people against one another. Slot people into little boxes. She's an African-American, bisexual, atheist, liberal, urbanite Sanders-supporter, whereas I'm an Hispanic, conservative, christian, rural Trump-supporter. You see it in their media and in online discussion all the time. Step one in any debate is to stick labels on the other guy so you know who you're up against. Everyone has labels. Which ultimately creates division, gives everyone their own unique little flag to rally under. " You could actually take that description and apply it to how many nationalists debate Northern Ireland. Not only do they rule out encompassing Unionists within a solution, they reject different views of nationalism if they are not fully in agreement with everything that SF stand for. Labelling people as partitionists or "nationalists" in inverted commas in order to disregard their argument is a handy way of avoiding uncomfortable truths. Rather than call me a partitionist, explain the alternative and how I am wrong.
A united Ireland does not have to be rejected because of temporary economic cost or even a societal one if it is for the betterment of everyone in the long term. Which is the very essence of 'nationalism'.
FrancieBrady wrote: » You my friend are not a 'nationalist' you are with that attitude closer to a partitionist. .
