Northern Ireland 2125?

Sitting on the deck here enjoying some scones and coffee.

What you doing yourself @mattser - stalking and reading threads you have no interest in and getting in a rage? Mind yourself these days, you might overheat 😁

The danger for Unionism, (and it is up to them how seriously they take it) is that Westminster can promise the moon but when it comes to selfish GB interests, GB will do what it wants and to hell with 'promises'. If it comes to selfish English interests, the rest of GB will come off worse and if it comes to Southern English interest the rest of England can sod off.

Unionism has all the proof of that they require.

So in a UI, we adopt what is in the GFA with regard to identity.

Anyone born in Ireland (the 32 existing counties and islands) has citizenship and equal rights to identify as they please.

If you were not born in Ireland and are accepted for citizenship, you also have an equal right to your identity.

Citizenship of other countries has nothing to do with Ireland but dual citizenship is allowed.

Can't see any problems with that.

You are the one who asked ( and I quote)

"Has anyone ever been arrested for not obeying this UK law? Should I be fearful for not changing my belief when I cross the border, sometimes up to 20 times a day?"

The only danger for the people of N.Ireland, especially those from the P.I.L. background there, is being suckered in to a U.I. They should know when it comes to their interests, the interests of Republicans will always come first. We see that the whole time, from the way pIRA were not extradited to N.Ireland during the troubles, to Casement park funding, to the way the Judge behaved during the trial of G.Adams in Dublin. When it comes to selfish Republican interests, unionists can sod off and when it comes to selfish Dublin interest the rest of Ireland can sod off.

I never mentioned 'drink driving law'.
The only law I discussed was the one blanch quoted, the British law on Nationality.

The only danger for the people of N.Ireland, especially those from the P.I.L. background there, is being suckered in to a U.I.

Nobody will be 'suckered' into a UI.
A UI will happen after democratic referendums in which every citizen will have one vote of equal weight, There will be no gerrymandering, rules about property required to vote, no outside impediments. It will be a decision for 'the people of the island of Ireland'.

If both referendums succeed it will be the majority of Ireland recognising that partition has failed and it's creation - NI - will cease to exist.

P.S,

What does the 'I' stand for there?

especially those from the P.I.L. background there

The drink driving law was mentioned earlier. If you are in N.I., which is part of the UK of Gt. Britain and N.I.., you better obey the laws there, including the laws on drink driving. Being"Irish" is no excuse.

PIL was a typo, of course I meant people from the Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist background. They are the ones threatened most in a possible U.I. Rather than persuade unionists that there is no genuine threat to their place in the UK, people like Varadkar seems determined to make them feel more threatened and besieged. Varadkar even claims that political parties in Dublin should see the province’s take-over as an objective rather than an aspiration and they should include it in their election manifestos. He even suggested that an official commission should be established south of the border, to draft a plan for dislodging Northern Ireland from the UK.

There was a referendum in 1973 in N.Ireland on the future of N.Ireland. There was no gerrymandering, no rules about property required to vote, no outside impediments (apart from Republican intimidation of voters and threat to bomb polling stations that day). A majority of the electorate ( not just voters on the day ) voted to stay in the UK. Of course you are going to claim some nationalist boycotted the referendum : yet voter turnout was higher than most referendums we have here. Go figure.

I don't need to make any claims about that shambles of a referendum. The BBC and and media reports from the time say it was boycotted.
Perhaps get on to them? This is from the CAIN website:

Thursday 8 March 1973

The Border Poll

 A referendum was held on whether or not the people of Northern Ireland wanted to remain part of the United Kingdom (UK). This referendum became known as the 'Border Poll'.

However, Nationalists boycotted the referendum and only 57 per cent of the electorate took part in the poll.

It was not surprising therefore that, of those who took part, 98 per cent were in favour of maintaining the Union with Britain.

And moderate Unionists will discuss a UI, will accept a UI if a majority vote for it while hard-liners will blow a gasket if they see so much as a few words of Irish on a manhole cover.

That is not a 'community' who can be depended on to feel the same way about constitutional change. And yes, before you waste time typing, the same applies to what is called the C.N.R. community.

What law of the land does NI fall under?

Westminster or The Dail?

Voter turnout was 57%, which compares very favourably with referendums here. You have no issue with the democratic result of referendums here. You accept results of referendums here even when a majority of the electorate do not vote for something, but still win because they were a majority of the voters on the day. But when a majority of the electorate ( not just voters on the day ) wins in N.I. you dismiss them because they were from the PUL community…..shows how you did not respect their democratic wishes then and you would not respect them in a U.I. either. Shame on you. Like Gerry Adams, least you could do is say sorry. No excuse in continuing that bombing campaign and murdering innocents etc.

D'ya think there's a possibility things might have changed even a little in over 50 years, Francis? What bearing does a poll boycotted by one community from 50 years ago have on absolutely anything being discussed?

It is the same "statelet" which would vote on any future referendum there ….so why would you accept the democratic wishes of the people there now but not accept them in 1973, even though it was one vote per person in 1973?

Do not only do you denigrate the PUL voters, you denigrate anyone who looks at the facts of that period by saying " nobody credible refers to that shambles ever".

What an insult to the electorate, who braved the threat of pIRA bombings on the day.