Seth Brundle wrote: » i didn't. I suggested that you tone down the rhetoric!
Professor Moriarty wrote: » What is an FFG?
Infini wrote: » Tweedledee and Tweedledum parties aka FG and FF. Some consider the 2 parties 2 sides of the same one hence the FFG thing. Seen that one bandied around the journal comments sections (*cough*) and on reddit.
yagan wrote: » Name calling? Is not Calvinism a central part of the protestant tradition particular to peoples in the north east of Ireland, and do they not claim descendancy from English and Scottish colonialism? You can't just flippingly dismiss their heritage. Have some respect.
Seth Brundle wrote: » What did he say?
yagan wrote: » He asserted SF had no protestant rep, which rebutted by a SF protestant TD. Leo thinks protestants can't be republicans, obviously hadn't studied 1798.
Seth Brundle wrote: » Have you a link so I can read it rather than read a second hand version?
yagan wrote: » The reformation is central to their identity. I'm of a mixed catholic/protestant background and I have zero problems understanding that when someone identifies themselves politically with a religion then they really aren't a fit for secular democracy. Many here can't seem to grasp that some people live their religion publicly via politics. It makes zero sense to most of us in secular Ireland obviously, but that's the way it is. In many ways Aontú have more in common with the DUP than with anyone other party on the island. Their greatest threat isn't Catholicism, it's secular democracy which supersedes religious affiliation. I really don't know why people can't get that religion is central to the DUP and those they represent. Their greatest threat is secular democracy.
yagan wrote: » I heard google is a thing.
Seth Brundle wrote: » I actually did a Google news search earlier and nothing was returned which is why I asked, so no need for the curt response.
Infini wrote: » Honestly man what is this exactly? How many people on the island actually care about this or do you think would care about this? As far as I'm concerned everyone up there are all Northies to me except for the small minority of headbangers who are about as annoying as the local scrotes. Vast majority of people up there are just people to me and I couldnt care less about religion and honestly would question why thats even a thing in this day and age. The vast majority dont have time anymore for pointless toxic garbage they're more concerned about day to day issues. The only ones really causing trouble so far are the loyalist hasbeens who are lashing out at the protocol because they refuse to accept the hard realities supporting Brexit has caused them and that Boris and co never cared bout them and even then its mainly been low key stuff and nothing serious.
Charles Babbage wrote: » Religion is not an obstacle to responsible politics. However, the DUP have a particular version of it, the "love thy neighbour" bit is not highlighted in their version, nor the "Do not steal" when it comes to occupying other people's countries. Indeed there are evangelical religious movements in the 6 counties who regard the DUP imperialistic world view as heresy. The DUP are working for themselves, not for God.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » The DUP minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs believes that the Earth was created 6,000 years ago.
yagan wrote: » In another party Gregory Campbell would be suspended for his songs of praise BLM comments, but not in god's own DUP.
Fionn1952 wrote: » As someone who has voted the other way for the same reason when living in the North, I'm sure everyone is fully aware that a huge number of DUP's vote base don't vote for them because they support their stance on social matters or because they find them personally affable. They vote DUP to prevent SF from taking seats.
yagan wrote: » SF wants NI to join the secular democracy of the republic of Ireland so ergo, the only sectarians are the unionists and shame on Leo Varadkar for not knowing that there are protestants who fought for that. He'll get a real shock when someone tells him Sam McGuire and Douglas Hyde were protestants.
Fionn1952 wrote: » Feel free to decline answering, but how much time have you spent living in the North?
yagan wrote: » The same amount of time you've lived in Ireland. Am I free to go now?
Fionn1952 wrote: » If you didn't want to answer, you were free to decline.
yagan wrote: » That's the Ireland we want. Not the unionist utopia of arrest without warrant and detention without trial.
Fionn1952 wrote: » That'd be some impressive, persuasive rhetoric among certain crowds I'm sure. Doesn't really change the fact that you have a weird caricatured picture of around a million people we would like to be productive, happy members of our society. Harking back to internment forty years ago doth butter no parsnips as a persuasion technique when speaking with someone who had (entirely innocent) family members interned. Nothing you can say about it will surprise me, nor will it make your caricatured views of half the place correct, particularly given the number of people who weren't alive when it happened.
yagan wrote: » We've have arrest of documentary makers uncovering collusion in the last few years. The DUP oppose the GFA and the paras they engaged have now withdrawn from the peace process. The DUP are voted in and their supporters know the DUP stance towards the democratic peace process. It's an absolute fantasy to believe that the core of the unionist voter wants democracy. For them elections are just headcounts.
Fionn1952 wrote: » Yes, yes, we all know what the DUP are. Projecting that onto the average Unionist is no more logical than blaming the average Nationalist for tiger kidnappings or proxy bombing.
yagan wrote: » The average person who wants to end partition does so to get away from sectarianism. However today we had the Tainaste use sectarianism to attack his political opponents. Has he criticised the DUP for opposing the GFA that was ratified on the island?
Fionn1952 wrote: » ....the average person who wants to end partition votes to be part of a country who, according to you was previously led, and now has in their number two seat (with an agreement to take over leading again) someone who you're accusing of sectarianism.....to get away from sectarianism?! What sort of ar*eways logic is that? Like you can read the entirely self defeating nature of the post you just made? And you're arguing with a Republican here, so I sure as hell can't see how your rhetoric is going to convince people to actually vote for Unification!?
