Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Migration Megathread

1697071727375»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,435 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Yes. The report lists the categories of people who will be protected under the proposed legislation. They include "white Irish" and Catholics.

    I don't see that as correct. "Native, white Irish" and "Catholics" were brought up in the public consultations as groups needing protection - see page 25. But in the actual conclusions (page 40) the only protected groups being added to those already covered by the 1989 legislation are disability and gender identity. If I've missed something please point it out.
    There seems to be a sort of willful determination to see this as "a bad thing", so I do have to ask if you're viewing the proposals in a dispassionate light? I mean, you're essentially arguing that legislation attempting to curtail persecution is, by that very curtailment, a persecution.

    It is a bad thing. "Hate speech" and "hate crime" are vague, undefined terms which can be abused and have been abused in other jurisdictions. Under the proposals, the concept is so open to abuse that "scientific or academic discourse, and fair and accurate reporting" need specific exemptions and protections to be protected from prosecution under this law. Fair and accurate reporting might otherwise be classified as "hate speech"! Ordinary people wont get the same protections though.

    These laws are not used to combat "hate". They are instead used to persecute the indigenous people. I already gave the example of a UK schoolgirl being convicted because she posted rap lyrics on her social media. On the other hand, the Rochdale grooming gang who raped, tortured and abused English girls that they targeted on ethnic grounds - because they were English - were not charged with hate crimes, nor did they receive any higher sentences due to the ethnic targeting.

    I think it's very telling that in the Irish times article government fears about "anti-immigration" elements hijacking the debate were reported.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,435 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Except Northern Ireland being peaceful shows it is not an assertion.

    A peace secured by an international border, and an ethnic power sharing arrangement between two groups exhausted by decades of murder and atrocity. Yeah, no problems there then.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,435 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Yes it’s better than endless cycles of killings and bombings which some of us are old enough to remember.

    It took for both sides to finally admit there are several cultures, extending of citizenship and having a path to democratic reunification in a new multicultural republic.

    Peace was achieved by embracing multiculturalism.

    The 'endless cycle of killings and bombings' were rooted in multiculturalism. Multiculturalism was the cause, not the solution. Two ethnic groups competing for power within the same territory is not a recipe for peace or good government. As it was, the solution was segregation in the form of a new international border between the North and the rest of Ireland. Within Northern Ireland itself, which remained ethnically divided, the only solution to date has been an ethnic power sharing arrangement which recognizes and legitimizes the ethnic conflict. It doesn't actually solve it.

    I cant possibly guess as to why you want to create a similar ethnic conflict in the Republic and I know you don't know why either. But I can be extremely clear that it is absolutely not in the interests of the indigenous Irish to do so.


Advertisement