I think this will pass, but not by much due to a low turnout. All the main parties are backing it, only the fringe right wing gript crowds are against it. Going against something purely because the green party are backing it is a bit silly imo. But I do agree the wording is not great in it.
Nothing to do with the Green agenda or scaremongering - I'm listening/reading to a Senior Counsel's take on it. If anyone has links to advice from similarly qualified I'll read or listen to that too.
That's true it wouldn't be a reason to change the constitution but it would at least be a case the government could point to.
I'm not sure what legislation the government wish to bring in that they currently can't because it would be struck down by the supreme court.
It's all very wishy washy hypothetical situations about protections with no real life example I have heard about. They can't even say what durable means other than not a business relationship or someone and their cat.
Neale Richmond let the cat out of the bag a while back on RTE. He admitted that the only reason the government were trying to pass these bullshit referenda was so that all the fakeugees who the government has illegally people trafficked into this country would be able to go to the courts with free legal aid no doubt and claim hat their third cousin twice removed in Somalia had a durable relationship with them and therefore was entitled to come and live with them in Ireland. This would open the floodgates completely and see this country flooded with millions more fakeugees.
Closer they get to government the more of a centralist party they become, probably because it’s the most sensible politics for running a country, the middle ground.
centralist politics isn’t a problem in ireland or any country for that matter, my problem is that there aren’t sufficient competent politicians to choose from on the ballot sheets
If everyone who's says there voting no actually votes then it just might scrape a No on both
They're voting No...I'll have watch my their, there ,they're s
This 100%.
if you are in doubt and are not affected by the current set up- then it should be no- as in no change.
If they are desperate to change it, let them reword it and come back again.
the biggest problem is people not voting because they don’t understand it- that give more power to the yes side.
as for the main parties supporting it- they are all cut from the same cloth. Mary Lou calls herself SF but she was FF for long enough.
Don't worry about it, we get the gist, we all write in the vernacular here
It didn't happen.
Oran Doyle is an Irish constitutional expert. He gives quite a simple explanation here.
in other words…
how can withholding minutes on these meetings be of national interest,
Transparency in this instance is of national interest.
Exactly. The Minister never threatened to defund NGOs. It didn't happen.
And why would NGOs have to explain themselves as their preference on the vote?
Its amazing the way the government visualise these mickey mouse issues as progressive when they should be focusing on progressing the fundamentals of the state like health, justice, education. All of which have regressed in the past 2 decades. Talk about been out of touch with the ordinary taxpayer.
Back at time of the crash these NGOs were referred to as Quangos and seen as a drain on finance with little upside. Good to see we learned from past mistakes!!
The gript subscription is going well for you I see.
Is there a need? If you go back through the thread- the only comments targeted at individual posters are from the no side.
It seems to be shut down conversations by name calling.
That’s all the looney left has, when they start feeling threatened is to put names and labels on anyone that doesn’t agree with them.
The irony. 😂 😂😂
:)
Rubbish. I have every confidence that the majority of voters will apply a little bit of critical thinking and will not fall for the garbage you are swallowing up from the internet and repeating.
Article 41.1.1° “The State recognises the Family, whether founded on marriage or on other durable relationships, as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.”
This is an aspiration, it is neither a right nor an obligation and even those little Somalis dancing in your head know enough English to understand the difference, even if you don't.
This referendum looks unnecessary to me, especially in light of the health and housing crisis.
It’s also likely to be a vote of confidence in the current Govt. And whatever about the interpretation of the specific words proposed, I’m guessing confidence in Leo, Michéal, and Eamon is fairly low.
That kind of unwelcome forceful writing doesn't become a so called moderater in this forum!!!
..
Neale Richmond, FG and minister for state did say on Virgin medias tonight show that the referendum would have consequences on immigration. So while I’m not the biggest fan of tankos wording, they still have a right to an opinion.
try being a bit more tolerant of others opinions please
Roderick O Gorman implied a possibility of consequences for those NGOs who didn't put their support behind the Gov position...it's a bit like the local thug saying "I know where you live"
It's a threat all day long!!!!!
He's loyalty is to Doctrine not to the country or the citizenry.
Opinion reread the language, he might want to more tolerant of other people tbh
But they didn’t aim directly at you. Your comments are directly at them and looking for a reaction imo.
So what if not directed at me, that language is appalling dehumanizing any group in society and generalizing them is disgraceful imo.
picking on people in society who have the least no matter of nationality is wrong and I will continue to object to anyone that takes that stance.
So call them out for their language.
