Have the govt done it this time!

ArthurDent

samb wrote:

I doubt it was this EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY ACT, 1998 SECTION 37

No you're right - apologies - it was the Education Act and Unfair dismissal act

http://www.ucc.ie/law/irlii/cases/d5310_85.htm

trippy30

Right I just got back.

Firstly there are teachers who are concerned and fearful about being gay and teaching in RC schools. So much so they setup a support group.
This area was covered in the Irish Times about 3 months ago. I can get the link for you. It will take me a little while to find.

Secondly a poll was done in the Irish Times I believe in which the majority of people now want religious instruction taking out of our schools.
I would support that too.

Secondly on the issue of gay adoption. The argument is quite simple, a single person can adopt in this country. Irrespective of whether they are straight or gay. Point being, what exactly is the point of FG objecting on this.

That somehow if your gay and in a loving relationship then it warrants research to justify? More so than others eh?

Why is this the case a single person can already?

That’s a load of bo**ocks to be quite frank. Personally Id call that political cowardice. They won’t touch this because of fear of the conservative electorate - pure and simple.
From a party that purports to be strong and decisive, its got this completely wrong. Because if you look at this issue from the perspective of the child, the answer is obvious. Simply do it - there is no point ignoring it either.
It guarantees the child security should somthing happen.
Under the UN convention (rights of the child) its glaringly obvious what needs to be done.
There is also research is already available in the States. Linc in cork have such information on this.

Lastly if that isnt good enough, what about the children who in Ireland who already are in this situation. Are we supposed to wait for the conservatives to feel comfortable about it, because their needs are more important?

FG are way too conservative for me to vote for. And their leader being a deeply conservate leader bothers me.

The other thing I want to point out is that the recent legislation passed, FG wanted the age of consent at 17 and from what I understand wouldn’t agree to it otherwise.

Labour complained about how in criminalised teenagers and seemed to suggest they wanted it lower. Given that we all know that teenagers do engage in sexual activity.

They at least seemed to be more grounded in reality.

This is out prospective opposition, at complete odds with each other on this issue. Its worrying to say the least, trying to be all things to all people.

Telling us that child rapists are everywhere and feeding hysteria, yet failing to notice what it really is to be concerned or interested in childrens rights and interests.

What a joke - its not convincing me at all.

Time Magazine

gilroyb wrote:

I knew where they were placed on that scale, but I didn't know where it was empirically. It would have to have been my lecturer, wouldn't it?

The shame on you bit was scolding you for not knowing your lecturers' publications inside out. Don't you know the best reference in Transport Economics is always Barrett et al, and so on.

trippy30 wrote:

Secondly on the issue of gay adoption. The argument is quite simple, a single person can adopt in this country. Irrespective of whether they are straight or gay. Point being, what exactly is the point of FG objecting on this.

You just pulled out the Shinner defence. Just because single people are allowed to adopt (let's call this a "Bad Thing About Adoption") does not mean that gay couples should be allowed to adopt (let's also call this a "Bad Thing About Adoption").

Let me explain the Shinner reference. I once asked one to justify the murder of Irish civilians and police in acts that the majority of people don't want. He responded by asking me to justify Hiroshima (the bombing thereof). There appears to be a link, but ultimately there is none. Let's say Hiroshima was justified, that bears no moral pull on the IRA. Similarly, if Hiroshima was morally corrupt, the IRA could still be considered justified/unjustified.

Ideally, in my opinion, the only people who should be allowed to adopt are straight, 'capable' couples. We see the litany of social ills that fall unto single-parents kids (on average, of course). I predict that something similar would happen with gay couples, albeit softened. As gilroyb said this will be hard to quantify, but we will get a strong indication from the UK.

They at least seemed to be more grounded in reality.

You mean are closer to your personal opinion really, don't you? Of course kids under 17 are sexually active, FG are not blind to this, you couldn't possibly accept that they might have other reasons for proposing it be kept at 17? No, that might be sensible.

This is out prospective opposition, at complete odds with each other on this issue. Its worrying to say the least, trying to be all things to all people.

I've answered this point already. Fine Gael are somewhat conservative, Labour are not. Nobody says there's going to be a grand formation of a new party, but a coalition. A year difference in the age of consent is not going to make a government fall, nor cause any great controversy. Similarly Labour's objection to the Triple Lock mechanism will probably waiver if, for example, American troops are pulled out of Shannon. FG and Labour are not polar opposites, they're about as close as FF+PD.

What a joke - its not convincing me at all.

If you think FG are too conservative for you then that's fine. FG are somewhat conservative and don't hide it, it's not a bad word.

trippy30

Angry Banana wrote:

Ideally, in my opinion, the only people who should be allowed to adopt are straight, 'capable' couples.

So FG would stand over changing what stands in Ireland at present?

Angry Banana wrote:

As gilroyb said this will be hard to quantify, but we will get a strong indication from the UK.

So why not the US – then? Because you don’t accept it by any chance – Whatever happened to Ireland thinking for itself?
FG will follow others it seems rather than engage or understand what is happening in Ireland today.
There are couples in Ireland who are jointly looking after children, you must know that the only people you pernalise doing this is children.
You have no hope of maintaining that line on this.
I hope you feel proud!

Angry Banana wrote:

You mean are closer to your personal opinion really, don't you? Of course kids under 17 are sexually active, FG are not blind to this, you couldn't possibly accept that they might have other reasons for proposing it be kept at 17? No, that might be sensible.

Well that was what Labour wanted wasn’t it?
As a concerned parent, perhaps FG should stop assuming the impractical supposedly high moral (almost religious like) ground. One that has no basis in reality
I would have thought 16 would have been more appropriate. Instead 16 yr olds who can possibility be criminalised as a result.
Nice one lads.
Feeling proud still?

Angry Banana wrote:

If you think FG are too conservative for you then that's fine. FG are somewhat conservative and don't hide it, it's not a bad word.

Yes it is, I think FG will be a step back to conservative Ireland. To the extent that I cannot vote Labour because FG (and its lurch to the religious right) might get into power.

The current govt are awful, but I also support clown bag’s view, that you leave me no choice but to vote for a government I wouldn’t ordinarily support.

FG doesn’t convince me, and Labour as much as I have sympathy for, are too ‘in’ with the unions for my liking. You are parties that look backwards rather than forward.

Hardly a combination that will deliver reform, or be any different in my view.

Time Magazine

trippy30 wrote:

So FG would stand over changing what stands in Ireland at present?

I don't know off the top of my head. You seem interested in the issue and are clearly giving it a lot of time (that's the fourth response) so feel free to ask them.

So why not the US – then? Because you don’t accept it by any chance

The US is far more different in socio-economic and cultural terms to our country than the UK. An implementation of, say, the smoking ban is better tested in the UK than in the US. But, of course, US data should be used as well.

Whatever happened to Ireland thinking for itself?

Stupid, stupid point. Right, in deciding whether or not we'll use nuclear energy let's not look to accidents in Chernobyl or the States because it's evidence from outside of Ireland. Get off it.

FG will follow others it seems rather than engage or understand what is happening in Ireland today.

Yes, FG don't understand what's going on, that's perfectly right.

There are couples in Ireland who are jointly looking after children, you must know that the only people you pernalise doing this is children.

Couples jointly looking after children, and the child is penalised? Seriously, wtf are you on about? If it's gay couples you probably should mention that.

You have no hope of maintaining that line on this.
I hope you feel proud!

Yes, I do. I've no idea what you're on about but I feel proud nonetheless.

Well that was what Labour wanted wasn’t it?

I'm not in Labour. Labour support the Triple Lock Mechanism which, in my mind, hands our foreign policy to China. I don't like that, but it's not something we're going to go to war over. (Badum tish, anyone?)

As a concerned parent, perhaps FG should stop assuming the impractical supposedly high moral (almost religious like) ground. One that has no basis in reality

Instead of understand FG's reasons you assume they're jumping on an impractical high moral ground, you must be proud. The reasons are primarily cautionary. In general, it's not desirable to have 16 year olds sleeping together, for one thing condom failure rates are in the region of 45% at that age. And woe be those who allow their religious beliefs impact on their opinions, are they not entitled to them, no?

I would have thought 16 would have been more appropriate. Instead 16 yr olds who can possibility be criminalised as a result.
Nice one lads.
Feeling proud still?

Trolling, or at least personally attached still? I'd think 17 is more appropriate, condom failure rates drop to about 25% at that age.

Yes it is, I think FG will be a step back to conservative Ireland.

Yes, because the public would love that.

To the extent that I cannot vote Labour because FG (and its lurch to the religious right) might get into power.

Lurch to the religious right? Give ANY weblink to provide evidence that they're lurching to the religious right!

The current govt are awful, but I also support clown bag’s view, that you leave me no choice but to vote for a government I wouldn’t ordinarily support.

Fair enough, unfounded fears about a lurch to the religious right while in government with Labour are less desirable to the wreckless management of the country, failure to provide for the societal good and so on, I suppose.

FG doesn’t convince me, and Labour as much as I have sympathy for, are too ‘in’ with the unions for my liking. You are parties that look backwards rather than forward.

Because Bertie's not in with the unions? And FG have never shown vision, what with the whole European movement and Tallaght Accord and delivering budget surpluses and free third-level education and 12% corporation tax. And Labour, of all parties, look to the good old days as well yeah?

Hardly a combination that will deliver reform, or be any different in my view.

Right so you say we're not going to deliver reform, but lurch to the right with zany Christo-Fascist policies? Make your mind up. As I said before, but you failed to note, there will be a general slight shift to the left if/when the Rainbow get into power. Some things will be more right, such as justice; but others such as education and health will be more to the left.

Dirk Gently

trippy30 wrote:

The current govt are awful, but I also support clown bag’s view, that you leave me no choice but to vote for a government I wouldn’t ordinarily support.

Always happy to see people support my view but it is highly unlikely I will be supporting the present government. The only question is will I vote for the coalition or else will I be forced to help out another candidate by lending my support to a local independent should one step up in my area come election time who I agree with politically.

I would rather vote for a strong opposition but I just don't see how Labour can marry their traditional values with their right of centre partners. This lack of unity and clear direction may just force me to give up my free time and campaign on behalf of an independent next June which I view as somewhat limited considering a strong party voice is greater than a lone independent voice. I am hoping to see a stronger alliance and clear direction from the opposition to save me from having to support someone who is always going to be limited in what they can achieve; however I would rather go down with the right choice than succeed with a wrong choice.

It is disappointing that dbnavan( a FG member ) and user jackwhite ( a LAB youth member) did not make any attempt to win me over. I am open to persuasion and actually want to vote LAB/FG if only I new what the hell they where all about. Dbnavan simply bashed the current government and told me to vote FG and hope for the best as he doesn’t know what FG will do when in power, but guarantees me it will be good. Jack White the labour youth person told me that he doesn’t agree with a lot of what the Labour party is doing, including the alliance with FG. He assured me that Labour youth were politically to the left of the Labour party proper. Again not very convincing. Just how will Labour and FG work together. Will they flip a coin to decide issues which clash with left and right wing ideology or will FG just take the lead negating Labours influence. I need to know what I’m getting for my vote.

cast_iron

lostexpectation wrote:

the AG and DPP and the MOJ knew about this case and didn't prepare for the worsts its simple as that.

So are you saying that you work in the DOJ, and offices of AG and DPP to know this as fact? Perhaps you are one of the civil servants some people are trying to blame.

samb

I'm not sure why you all have the impression that FG are so right wing. I think that a LB FG coaliton or indeed LB FG+Greens would both be a very slight shift left. I think FG are coming out with some old fashioned conservative retoric simply to energise and win over a considerable proportion of the Irish electorate who are old fashioned and conservative. I think some of you may be underestimating how conservative rural ireland still is, and FG need to gain there support.
It's like the Gay marriage issue helping Bush in the US, after the election he doesn't actually achieve what turned out the votes.
I think that behind the Right retoric of FG and the Left of Labour they would both be very pragmatic in power because they know that if the economy goes down under there watch (even though if it does it would all most certainly be because of outside influences or FF property bubble legacy) then we will have another 20 years of FF.