Would You Support A New Constitution And Flag

Nevyn · 16-11-2010 12:50AM

OisinT wrote: »

What's wrong with our Constitution?

It's a quasi religious amended mess.

And I prefer the gold harp on a field of green but would keep the tricolour not due to what it meant but how other countries adopted variations of it as a mark of respect.

Dan_Solo · 16-11-2010 01:01AM

My name is URL wrote: »

It goes downhill after this part =p

"In the presence of Almighty God..."

Nah, it goes downhill right here.:D

Dan_Solo · 16-11-2010 01:02AM

ryaner012 wrote: »

the flag consisting of the 4 provinces individual flags is also impressive.

Maybe so, but it looks a bugger to paint on your face at St Patrick's Day.

wonderfulname · 16-11-2010 01:17AM

THFC wrote: »

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

It is broke, it does need fixing.

OP, Wheres the no, just the constitution, and just the flag options?

The constitution needs to be changed, it is sexist, homophobic, and horribly biased towards the catholic church. Yes it guarantees not to endow any religion but it does this whilst holding "Almighty God... name in reverence" and of course "we the people of Eire, Humbly acknowledged all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ..." we do in our... Anyone who disagrees should give it a read.

The idea that the laws of this country are governed by such drivel is crazy. The problem with an edit is you effectively need to edit the whole thing, it makes far more sense to redo the whole thing and leave the current one to the history which makes people view it as untouchable.

A constitution is meant to represent the people, we have been so scared to mess with the creation of those proud rebels that eff all of the country is represented anymore.
The impression is given that it is the minority of people which are adversely effected by how outdated the constitution is, I think you'll find when you add women, gays, de facto families and anyone who is not a practising catholic you come up with an outstanding majority.

But the flags good, theres no need to change that.

FreudianSlippers · 16-11-2010 01:18AM

wonderfulname wrote: »

It is broke, it does need fixing.

OP, Wheres the no, just the constitution, and just the flag options?

The constitution needs to be changed, it is sexist, homophobic, and horribly biased towards the catholic church. Yes it guarantees not to endow any religion but it does this whilst holding "Almighty God... name in reverence" and of course "we the people of Eire, Humbly acknowledged all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ..." we do in our... Anyone who disagrees should give it a read.

The idea that the laws of this country are governed by such drivel is crazy. The problem with an edit is you effectively need to edit the whole thing, it makes far more sense to redo the whole thing and leave the current one to the history which makes people view it as untouchable.

A constitution is meant to represent the people, we have been so scared to mess with the creation of those proud rebels that eff all of the country is represented anymore.
The impression is given that it is the minority of people which are adversely effected by how outdated the constitution is, I think you'll find when you add women, gays, de facto families and anyone who is not a practising catholic you come up with an outstanding majority.

But the flags good, theres no need to change that.

There certainly are bad parts in it, but the foundation is good and modern. The vast majority of law the emanates from the Constitution is good.

OPENROAD · 16-11-2010 01:21AM

Maybe we could change the name of the country, or add a bit before the name of the country, we could have a bidding auction like they do for new sports stadium naming rights and have the flag sponsored.

Only joking

wonderfulname · 16-11-2010 01:23AM

OisinT wrote: »

There certainly are bad parts in it, but the foundation is good and modern. The vast majority of law the emanates from the Constitution is good.

Yes but that doesn't mean what they emanate from is good.

pablomakaveli · 16-11-2010 01:24AM

I would'nt be opposed to a modern constitution but lay off the flag. I'm sick of hearing people say lets change our flag so the unionists wont be sour anymore. They're always sour and changing the flag won't fix that.

Also the playing of Irelands Call should be banned.

FreudianSlippers · 16-11-2010 01:27AM

should say that emanates.

And most of it is genuinely good as is our Constitution (bar religion etc.)

wonderfulname · 16-11-2010 01:27AM

OPENROAD wrote: »

Maybe we could change the name of the country, or add a bit before the name of the country, we could have a bidding auction like they do for new sports stadium naming rights and have the flag sponsored.

Only joking

Hmm... I see benefits to this... can't see yanks of Irish heritage being too quick to call themselves Al Jazeera-Americans...

FreudianSlippers · 16-11-2010 01:36AM

wonderfulname wrote: »

Hmm... I see benefits to this... can't see yanks of Irish heritage being too quick to call themselves Al Jazeera-Americans...

The US has ****-all money. Don't see them sponsoring anyone anytime soon.

OPENROAD · 16-11-2010 01:36AM

OisinT wrote: »

The US has ****-all money. Don't see them sponsoring anyone anytime soon.

Plenty of profitable firms out there

wonderfulname · 16-11-2010 01:39AM

OisinT wrote: »

And most of it is genuinely good as is our Constitution (bar religion etc.)

I don't see any harm in instigating debate on the bits generally deemed as good, if all of it was open to change we could make them better.

FreudianSlippers · 16-11-2010 01:40AM

wonderfulname wrote: »

I don't see any harm in instigating debate on the bits generally deemed as good, if all of it was open to change we could make them better.

Agreed. I say focus the debate on the bad. Would love to see the church GTFO of our politics.

orourkeda · 16-11-2010 01:40AM

Flag. No.

Constitution. Possibly. Depends on the changes that are suggested.

wonderfulname · 16-11-2010 01:41AM

OisinT wrote: »

The US has ****-all money. Don't see them sponsoring anyone anytime soon.

Swoosh....

I'm saying if Al-Jazeera sponsored us Irish-Americans would quickly forget grandad came from co. clare and just be plain aul Americans.

mossyc123 · 16-11-2010 01:43AM

OisinT wrote: »

Agreed. I say focus the debate on the bad. Would love to see the church GTFO of our politics.

Happened quite a while ago I think...

"Fifth Amendment of the Constitution Act, 1972 [Removed from the Constitution the special position of the Catholic Church and the recognition of other named religious denominations.]"

epgc3fyqirnbsx · 16-11-2010 01:50AM

mossyc123 wrote: »

Happened quite a while ago I think...

"Fifth Amendment of the Constitution Act, 1972 [Removed from the Constitution the special position of the Catholic Church and the recognition of other named religious denominations.]"

But the holy trinity, which as far as I know is a catholic thing, is still contained in the preamble which can be often considered when considering the 'spirit' of the constitution

And such outdated ideas of the special place of the mother within the home and such notions that stemmed from old catholic Ireland...

These are the things which need working imo

I like, though lots dont, the fact that it doesn't contain a bill of rights. Rather they are unenumerated and are open to juducial interpretation which is useful as it ensures the constitution is organic and what may be considered natural rights can change with time

wonderfulname · 16-11-2010 01:52AM

mossyc123 wrote: »

Happened quite a while ago I think...

"Fifth Amendment of the Constitution Act, 1972 [Removed from the Constitution the special position of the Catholic Church and the recognition of other named religious denominations.]"

In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred,
We, the people of Éire,
Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial...

All powers of government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive, under God, from the people...

The President shall enter upon his office by taking and subscribing publicly, in the presence of members of both Houses of the Oireachtas, of Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Court, and other public personages, the following declaration:"In the presence of Almighty God I ,do solemnly and sincerely promise and declare that I will maintain the Constitution of Ireland and uphold its laws, that I will fulfil my duties faithfully and conscientiously in accordance with the Constitution and the law, and that I will dedicate my abilities to the service and welfare of the people of Ireland. May God direct and sustain me."...

Every member of the Council of State shall at the first meeting thereof which he attends as a member take and subscribe a declaration in the following form:"In the presence of Almighty God I, , do solemnly and sincerely promise and declare that I will faithfully and conscientiously fulfil my duties as a member of the Council of State."...

The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion.

It isn't named but I think its pretty obvious whos god we are talking about here, IMO the constitutions only reference to religion should be;

Article 44

2. 1° Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.

2° The State guarantees not to endow any religion.

3° The State shall not impose any disabilities or make any discrimination on the ground of religious profession, belief or status.

note I made a few snips...

Big Pussy Bonpensiero · 16-11-2010 01:53AM

Thaedydal wrote: »

It's a quasi religious amended mess.

And I prefer the gold harp on a field of green but would keep the tricolour not due to what it meant but how other countries adopted variations of it as a mark of respect.

Out of interest, what countries adopted variations??

mossyc123 · 16-11-2010 02:10AM

wonderfulname wrote: »

It isn't named but I think its pretty obvious whos god we are talking about here, IMO the constitutions only reference to religion should be;

note I made a few snips...

The preamble is reflective of the time, Catholic emancipation had only came about less then 100 years previously (1829 I think)
One of the primary motivations for becoming independent from London was the Catholic religion, something that set the majority of people in Ireland apart from the rest of Britain.

"4° Legislation providing State aid for schools shall not discriminate between schools under the management of different religious denominations, nor be such as to affect prejudicially the right of any child to attend a school receiving public money without attending religious instruction at that school.

5° Every religious denomination shall have the right to manage its own affairs, own, acquire and administer property, movable and immovable, and maintain institutions for religious or charitable purposes.

6° The property of any religious denomination or any educational institution shall not be diverted save for necessary works of public utility and on payment of compensation."

Don't see what the problem is with 4,5 & 6 myself.

wonderfulname · 16-11-2010 02:20AM

mossyc123 wrote: »

The preamble is reflective of the time, Catholic emancipation had only came about less then 100 years previously (1829 I think)

So, its not 100 years ago, the original isn't going to disappear, don't link history and a constitution, a constitution should be a changing document, the preamble must go.

mossyc123 wrote: »

Don't see what the problem is with 4,5 & 6 myself.

It is unnecessary, and you'll find that in practice it gives the RC church a leg up over other religions and denominations.

You agree 44.1 needs to go though? That bit really riles me..

Rebelheart · 16-11-2010 02:22AM

Aurum wrote: »

Speaking as someone who has spent the last 6 years studying the current Constitution...no. I'm not starting all over again damn it.

The thought of all those wigged D4 sycophants with their affected English accents, obsequious courtroom culture and colonial titles, dining cult and their autonomous governing Rules Committee has inspired me to now consider my objections to any changes.

Change everything if it will get rid of those pompous wannabe-English sycophants, the barristers and judges of this state, and take control of the culture which exists in public courtrooms of this republic from the elitist archaic Rules Committee of the Bar Council.

2010 and these legal arseholes are still keeping the courtrooms of modern Ireland in the 17th century. It's not so long ago that Séamus Ó Tuathail SC was condemned by a High Court judge (Keane) for refusing to wear that English wig. The greatest parasites in Irish society.

/end rant.

Faith+1 · 16-11-2010 02:43AM

Fcuk no!! Just because those FF hoardes hijacked this once great nation doesn't mean I'll swear alligance to a new flag and constitution.

mossyc123 · 16-11-2010 02:45AM

wonderfulname wrote: »

So, its not 100 years ago, the original isn't going to disappear, don't link history and a constitution, a constitution should be a changing document, the preamble must go.

It is unnecessary, and you'll find that in practice it gives the RC church a leg up over other religions and denominations.

You agree 44.1 needs to go though? That bit really riles me..

"1. The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion."

Don't understand what the hell the homage of public worship is so, yes, it probably should go. Also the Holy Trinity reference is fairly obviously Catholic. Personally, a few broad references to God/ our Christian heritage would do me, nothing too specific.

However, I don't where your coming from with saying that 4,5 & 6 are unnecessary. Considering persecution on religious grounds has been an ongoing problem througout centuries and across societies giving a few lines of the constitution to acknowledging the rights of Religions to hold assets and maintain themselves isn't exactly unnecessary.

Rebelheart · 16-11-2010 02:56AM

mossyc123 wrote: »

"1. The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion."

Don't understand what the hell the homage of public worship is so, yes, it probably should go. Also the Holy Trinity reference is fairly obviously Catholic. Personally, a few broad references to God/ our Christian heritage would do me, nothing too specific.

However, I don't where your coming from with saying that 4,5 & 6 are unnecessary. Considering persecution on religious grounds has been an ongoing problem througout centuries and across societies giving a few lines of the constitution to acknowledging the rights of Religions to hold assets and maintain themselves isn't exactly unnecessary.

If it's good enough for the US, which inspired the constitution, it's good enough for Ireland. Or, maybe not. And the Irish Constitution definitely could be worse: the Constitution could have followed Britain and made church and state one and passed legislation refusing to allow anybody but a Catholic to become Head of State/President of Ireland. It didn't.

Bunreacht na hÉireann is overall a very solid document which, through judicial review and referenda, has modernised any aspects of the Constitution which threatened modern rights (the McGee case in 1973 which ruled that the ban on contraceptives infringed the family's constitutional right to privacy being perhaps the most noticeable example of judicial review modernising Bunreacht na hÉireann)

TeddyTedson · 16-11-2010 03:00AM

I've always liked this flag
Its got a touch of class to it.
The regular tricolor is a bit dull looking alright.

K-9 · 16-11-2010 03:21AM

Rebelheart wrote: »

The thought of all those wigged D4 sycophants with their affected English accents, obsequious courtroom culture and colonial titles, dining cult and their autonomous governing Rules Committee has inspired me to now consider my objections to any changes.

Change everything if it will get rid of those pompous wannabe-English sycophants, the barristers and judges of this state, and take control of the culture which exists in public courtrooms of this republic from the elitist archaic Rules Committee of the Bar Council.

2010 and these legal arseholes are still keeping the courtrooms of modern Ireland in the 17th century. It's not so long ago that Séamus Ó Tuathail SC was condemned by a High Court judge (Keane) for refusing to wear that English wig. The greatest parasites in Irish society.

/end rant.

LOL!

As OisinT said, I don't think it is archaic as commonly portrayed, it seems to be a stick to beat DeV with, as if there weren't enough of them!

It's the interpretation of it seems to be the problem.

Dan_Solo · 16-11-2010 10:12AM

Rebelheart wrote: »

The thought of all those wigged D4 sycophants with their affected English accents, obsequious courtroom culture and colonial titles, dining cult and their autonomous governing Rules Committee has inspired me to now consider my objections to any changes.

Do you think all the lawyers, politicians and bankers come from D4?
Yeah, you probably do.

LordSutch · 16-11-2010 11:13AM

RockinRolla wrote: »

Would You Support A New Constitution And Flag

If you wish to 'Unite' with the Northern Unionists, then Yes! otherwise No.

Would You Support A New Constitution And Flag

Comments