Northern Ireland 2125?

No, you saw a council made up of several parties take a democratic vote on the matter.

In both cases.

Democratic votes are the only way a democratic society can function.
You have no alternative system that is workable.

Unilateral use (in many cases 'abuse') of the PoC and the Call-in mechanism has been used to BLOCK rights and democratic agreements.
Care to guess who has done by far and away the most?

Care to hazard a guess which STILL Active paramilitary groups have and are threatening violence over democratic decisions?

Democratic majority votes by democratically elected officials are an 'abuse of power'?

Falling around laughing here now.

Yes I do, if it is democratically achieved without gerrymandering and there is one vote per person entitled to a vote.

Not even Unionists think that ref meant anything.

They know that many nationalists then did not believe in democracy, as that referendum was fair and open to all.

Have you any link to back up your claim "Not even Unionists think that ref meant anything."? Of course unionists thought that ref. and subsequent elctions in the 1970s, 1980s etc meant something, as they were the clear majority in free and fair voting.

So you do NOT have any link to back up your claim "Not even Unionists think that ref meant anything."?

As noted already, of course unionists thought that ref. and subsequent elctions in the 1970s, 1980s etc meant something, as they were the clear majority in free and fair voting. Why would they have bothered voting otherwise? And they were the majority in that free and fair referendum and subsequent elections in the 70s and 80s, you cannot deny that.

And?

What has it to do with 'now' and your contention that democratic majority decisions should be ignored and Unionists should have a veto, be allowed to reject or should be appeased because they are offended?

"There were never any Irish language street signs in PUL areas in Belfast"

Might I suggest that you educate yourself as to why this was the case Francis?

Just Google "Irish Language Suppression". You'll find plenty to keep you going.

She should maybe have a look at why there are PUL and Nationalist 'areas'.

"By your logic, Native American languages were suppressed in America"

Bingo!

I do believe you are starting to understand now.

Native American languages were suppressed and that's what brought about the Native American Languages Act of 1990.

I'm glad you can see the parallels.

Interesting reviews from the reviewers (Donald Clarke and Serena Seghedoni) on RTE's Arena of the Gerry Adams documentary 'A Ballymurphy Man' both giving it 4 out of 5.

'Full of insights' and as one reviewer said, 'it was great because you think you know what happened but you realise watching it, you don't'.

I wasn't going to bother much about watching it, thinking it was a puff piece but I will after listening to that.

Nobody mentioned anything about a "hasty unplanned abandonment" if the majority of people wanted a U.I. People did not "boycott" the Scottish referendum in 2014 because they were worried about "hasty unplanned abandonment". When the UK left other places in the world were there any complaints from the majorities there about "hasty unplanned abandonment"? No.

First it was necessary to establish if the majority of people in 1973 in N.I. wanted to remain part of the UK or join with the Republic to form a U.I.  As noted already, the results were a conclusive victory for remaining in the UK. On a voter turnout of 58.7%, ( much higher than we will probably get in our 2-horse election in 8 days time), 98.9%, comprising 57.5% of registered voters, voted to remain in the U.K., meaning the outcome was not affected by any boycott of those who did not vote. Every adult was entitled to vote.

There was democratic consultation. Everyone was entitled to vote. In the early seventies the British government even flew the terrorists and their representatives to London to plead with them to stop their armed struggle / bombing campaign, but they said they would not until they got their U.I. The pIRA did not recognize the Irish state, never mind the UK authorities, so do not lecture the rest of us about democratic consultation.

The British had a good track record in withdrawing from where they were not wanted. That is why so many countries are in the Commonwealth now, they respect Britain. Better than the Belgians in Congo, the French in Algeria etc etc. As regards India, before the British arrived, India experienced conflict due to political fragmentation, with various princely states fighting wars with each another.  There were many major sources of conflict, such as the rise and fall of the Mughal Empire, religious conflicts between Hindus and Muslims, and internal rebellions, eg those by the Maratha Confederacy against Mughal rule etc.

You missed the point : there was a 1973 border poll referendum in N.I.  on whether Northern Ireland should remain part of the U.K.  or join with the Rep of Ireland to form a U.I.  The clear majority of the electorate (not just voters on the day) wanted to stay in the UK. Voting was fair and open to all adults.