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
Why can't Ireland join the Commonwealth?
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Ok, we could go on at this forever but I have 3 questions for the 'antis':
1) Why do you believe to be member of the Commonwealth is to be subservient to the United Kingdom? Have any of you ever met any Australians or South Africans? Best of luck telling them they are subservient to the UK
2)If a benefit to the economy could be proven, would you still be against it on principle?
3) If the whole commonwealth thing is so irrelevant and meaningless, why get so irate and frustrated at the notion of joining it?
0 -
The Chessplayer wrote: »Serious amount of trolling going on here.
Where boards.ie falls down is that it gives a platform to the sort of plonker who says that the Irish hate the English, English hate the French etc.
You're on boards all of one month and you're calling regulars trolls and plonkers
.
I never said The Irish hate the English, in fact in a way I admire a lot about them, let me state again my wife is English.It doesn't make me want to be one or part of their old boys club though.
I shouldn't have said the English hate the french, that was wrong of me. Nevertheless there is a lot of people in England who have a certain dislike of the French, I'm just stating something which was in evidence to me.
People have different viewpoints depending on how and where they were brought up and their experiences. I don't like the viewpoints of murphaph or ArthurF and they don't like mine. Doesn't make either of us plonkers (and note we managed not to get into name calling), just means if we were having a pint together probably best talk about women or football, as really it's clear that we just won't agree.
So I take exception to be referred to as a plonker, it was bang out of order imo. :mad:0 -
Advertisement
-
luckylucky wrote: »You're on boards all of one month and you're calling regulars trolls and plonkers.
I never said The Irish hate the English, in fact in a way I admire a lot about them, let me state again my wife is English.It doesn't make me want to be one or part of their old boys club though.
I shouldn't have said the English hate the french, that was wrong of me. Nevertheless there is a lot of people in England who have a certain dislike of the French, I'm just stating something which was in evidence to me.
People have different viewpoints depending on how and where they were brought up and their experiences. I don't like the viewpoints of murphaph or ArthurF and they don't like mine. Doesn't make either of us plonkers (and note we managed not to get into name calling), just means if we were having a pint together probably best talk about women or football, as really it's clear that we just won't agree.
So I take exception to be referred to as a plonker, it was bang out of order imo. :mad:
You probably didn't even read my entire post. No rational person could dispute anything from my above posting.
Merely stating that "there is alot of people in England who have a certain dislike of the French" is profoundly moronic. That's like saying there are alot of people in Ireland who think blacks are stupid. While I'm sure this may be the case, but proportionately it is totally insignificant - a useless comment, with no meaningful reference points. Anglo-French rivalry is more akin to the occasional Kerryman-style joke than to hatred - reduced, in the modern era, to a sporting rivalry. The Scots-English rivalry is perhaps even more intense on a sporting level, than the Irish-English one.
The greasy-haired fraternity of pro-British Commonwealthers are about as relevant as something which has absolutely no relevance whatsoever.
Murhaph and ArthurF: I am sure that An Taoiseach has never even discussed a jokey topic like future membership of the Commonwealth for Ireland with Blair or Brown. Do you not think that our government hasn't better things to be doing that getting involved in clownish debates such as these?
Ireland and Britain are fellow members of the EU, with a perfectly normal working relationship. Are you not happy enough with that? The average person has no desire to pander to unionist tokenism with gestures such as joining the Commonwealth. We are a forward thinking secular republic. Unionism is the backward doctrine of an ignoramus. I, for one, certainly don't advocate a United Ireland overrun by Ned Flanders-type dimwits.0 -
-
Then why are you getting so hot and bothered about it mate?The Chessplayer wrote: »The greasy-haired fraternity of pro-British Commonwealthers are about as relevant as something which has absolutely no relevance whatsoever.
I'll answer that when you answer my 3 simple questionsThe Chessplayer wrote: »Murhaph and ArthurF: I am sure that An Taoiseach has never even discussed a jokey topic like future membership of the Commonwealth for Ireland with Blair or Brown. Do you not think that our government hasn't better things to be doing that getting involved in clownish debates such as these?
No we aren't. From the preamble of Bunreacht na hEireannThe Chessplayer wrote: »Ireland and Britain are fellow members of the EU, with a perfectly normal working relationship. Are you not happy enough with that? The average person has no desire to pander to unionist tokenism with gestures such as joining the Commonwealth. We are a forward thinking secular republic. Unionism is the backward doctrine of an ignoramus. I, for one, certainly don't advocate a United Ireland overrun by Ned Flanders-type dimwits.
You either don't know what a secular state is or are ignorant of our constitution. Why am I not surprised.Constitution of Ireland wrote: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, Gratefully remembering their heroic and unremitting struggle to regain the rightful independence of our Nation, And seeking to promote the common good, with due observance of Prudence, Justice and Charity, so that the dignity and freedom of the individual may be assured, true social order attained, the unity of our country restored, and concord established with other nations, Do hereby adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this Constitution.0 -
Funny you should mention the Australians - they had a nationwide referendum in the late 1990s to remove the British Queen as their head of state. It was defeated. They still print the Queen's puss on their money, AND their flag contains a 1/4 scale Union Jack, as does that of New Zealand.Ok, we could go on at this forever but I have 3 questions for the 'antis':
1) Why do you believe to be member of the Commonwealth is to be subservient to the United Kingdom? Have any of you ever met any Australians or South Africans? Best of luck telling them they are subservient to the UK
Australia is quite clearly very subservient to the United Kingdom.
Anyone who suggests going down that road needs to have a damn good reason so for doing.
Is that possible?2)If a benefit to the economy could be proven, would you still be against it on principle?
Beacuse even thought its a pointless non-runner, an assortment of muppets and West Brits keep bringing it up?3) If the whole commonwealth thing is so irrelevant and meaningless, why get so irate and frustrated at the notion of joining it?0 -
-
Then why are you getting so hot and bothered about it mate?
I'll answer that when you answer my 3 simple questions
No we aren't. From the preamble of Bunreacht na hEireann
You either don't know what a secular state is or are ignorant of our constitution. Why am I not surprised.
Oh dear!
Murph - so you reckon that if the Commonwealth is so irrelevant (and yes, thank you, it is), then we should just go ahead and join the wretched thing anyway. "Sure why not", says you! This, my dear fellow, is the twisted logic of a brain-wrong.
The quoted passage from the Constitution is utterly meaningless....as well you know, for all your smugness! Anyone you thinks otherwise can safely be dismissed as a philistine. Am I not right?
Your ramblings remind me of 1920s Unionist propagandists, "Home Rule is Rome Rule". Sounds like you haven't been to the Republic of Ireland in the last 20 years, in which case I would suggest that you are not in a great position to comment on its secular nature.0 -
We have countless examples of buildings (and indeed post boxes!) in this republic with the royal insignia on. Are we subservient to the United Kingdom because of these legacy symbols? So you think Australians are subservient to the UK because of similar british symbols which they have also failed to remove from their country. Fair enough. What about South Africa then? Have you ever met any big south africans and told them that they're subservient to the UK? Best of luck doing that.Funny you should mention the Australians - they had a nationwide referendum in the late 1990s to remove the British Queen as their head of state. It was defeated. They still print the Queen's puss on their money, AND their flag contains a 1/4 scale Union Jack, as does that of New Zealand.
Australia is quite clearly very subservient to the United Kingdom.
Even if it weren't, why not try membership out to see if it benefits the economy and if it doesn't and we find the networking innefective then withdraw from it. Would that be ok or is it purely a 'principle' thing with those against it?Is that possible?
You think it's pointless but I won't call you a muppet or a gombeen man for holding that opinion Sean. I won't call you any silly names in fact.Beacuse even thought its a pointless non-runner, an assortment of muppets and West Brits keep bringing it up?0 -
Would a truly secular state end up in a situation where ghetto schools for non Roman Catholic children are springing up because of our oh-so non-secular state's almost total dependence on the Roman Catholic Church to educate and heal us. A secular state does NOT rely almost exclusively on a particular religion or religions to educate it's children. France is a secular state. State schools and hospitals are run by the state, not by any religion as they are here. Ireland is NOT secular and for that matter neither is the United Kingdom.The Chessplayer wrote: »Oh dear!
Murph - so you reckon that if the Commonwealth is so irrelevant (and yes, thank you, it is), then we should just go ahead and join the wretched thing anyway. "Sure why not", says you! This, my dear fellow, is the twisted logic of a brain-wrong.
The quoted passage from the Constitution is utterly meaningless....as well you know, for all your smugness! Anyone you thinks otherwise can safely be dismissed as a philistine. Am I not right?
Your ramblings remind me of 1920s Unionist propagandists, "Home Rule is Rome Rule". Sounds like you haven't been to the Republic of Ireland in the last 20 years, in which case I would suggest that you are not in a great position to comment on its secular nature.
You have been shown to be incorrect. Take it on the chin. 0 -
Slightly off topic maybe, but we do have a lot more in common with the large island next door than many Nationalists think!
About two years ago I looked into my family tree & discovered a Scottish & English lineage which I was totally unaware of, this led to conversations at home and in the office, which in turn led to some of my work colleagues doing a little bit of family tree research also ~ and the results were very interesting, specially for those who call people like me a 'West Brit' . . . for I probably am.
Out of thirteen Irish people in my Dublin office, ten discovered that they had English, Welsh or Scottish blood in their veins as well as Irish, this alone means nothing (I accept) but I do think that those Irish people who pretend that we are Culturally, Ethnically & Racially so different to the peoples on the island next door (Britain) should take a closer look at themselves & think again.
'Yes' to re-joining the Commonwealth for all the obvious Economic, Networking, Cultural, & Political reasons as stated in previous contributions.
Stay on topic ArthurF. No one cares about your lineage.
Where are you going with your 'Yes' to re-joining the CW? You saying 'yes' does not matter a hoot. It's not on the agenda. Sorry pal.
Irish blood, English blood...shudder. To reduce this to a debate about ethnicity and racial origins is absolutely disgusting! So, by your thinking, the Irish would be good and proper members of the CW, over say lesser members such as the Nigerians? The Irish, afterall, originating from similar peoples as the British, would surely be due a seat at the head table in the CW, beside the British.
Imperialist nonsense.
I believe there is a Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth also. Why not join that instead? 0 -
Would a truly secular state end up in a situation where ghetto schools for non Roman Catholic children are springing up because of our oh-so non-secular state's almost total dependence on the Roman Catholic Church to educate and heal us. A secular state does NOT rely almost exclusively on a particular religion or religions to educate it's children. France is a secular state. State schools and hospitals are run by the state, not by any religion as they are here. Ireland is NOT secular and for that matter neither is the United Kingdom.
You have been shown to be incorrect. Take it on the chin.
Such an meandering ramble. :rolleyes:
You, my dear chap, have a persecution complex. Forget about Putin, Bertie's record on human rights must be top of Amnesty's agenda - unparalleled religious oppression that exists in this Republic of Ireland. I hear the doctors in these hospitals make you recite an 'Our Father' become administering treatments.
Back to the CW issue, if we may. What if the UK were to leave it, would you still wish to join up?0 -
Advertisement
-
Dodge away but Ireland (neither part) is secular.The Chessplayer wrote: »Such an meandering ramble. :rolleyes:
You, my dear chap, have a persecution complex. Forget about Putin, Bertie's record on human rights must be top of Amnesty's agenda - unparalleled religious oppression that exists in this Republic of Ireland. I hear the doctors in these hospitals make you recite an 'Our Father' become administering treatments.
Back to the CW issue, if we may. What if the UK were to leave it, would you still wish to join up?
You think I have a persecution complex? Perhaps. My uncle was born premature and died before a priest could baptise him. The church denied this baby a catholic funeral and he was buried in a pit reserved for such "non-humans" outside the hospital. The church did persecute the people here. It still wields not inconsiderable power over our education and health services. You stated we were a secular republic and I pulled you up on it. Like I said, get over it.
As to your question (even though you never answered my three simple questions) I would believe there are greater potential economic benefits for us in dealing with the likes of India and the Antipodes than GB, we've always and will always have major trade links with the UK. So in answer to your question....yes. Surprised?0 -
-
Oh dear. You've just lost what little credibility you had left by refering to yourself in the third personThe Chessplayer wrote: »The most irritating thing for someone to do in a debate is to introduce a sob-story about a dead uncle or the like. I recall ArthurF doing the same thing in his ranting "Poppy Day" thread, stating that his uncle got killed by a German torpedo, so hence we should all be made celebrate Poppy Day. What in the name of all things sane does religion have to do with this thread? Since when is the Chessplayer the defender of all things catholic.
I have nothing to "get over" as you say. I'm not the one living in the past, and I won't sit back while you peddle this objectionable rubbish.
Commonwealth? NOT A CHANCE OF IT!!!
Look, my uncle and his treatment is just one isolated example of how this priest ridden land was and (to a lesser extent) still is under the kosh of the RC church. You claimed we were a secular state when the dogs in the street (as well as the constitution itself) knows we are not.0 -
Ok, we could go on at this forever but I have 3 questions for the 'antis':
1) Why do you believe to be member of the Commonwealth is to be subservient to the United Kingdom? Have any of you ever met any Australians or South Africans? Best of luck telling them they are subservient to the UK
2)If a benefit to the economy could be proven, would you still be against it on principle?
3) If the whole commonwealth thing is so irrelevant and meaningless, why get so irate and frustrated at the notion of joining it?
the bulk of the australian flag is made up of the union jack , that alone is a form of subserviance to the british
i dont see how it could benefit the economy , many of the countries in the commonwealth are dirt poor african countrys who trade much less with the uk than we do , canada is a member of the commonwealth and its biggest trading partner by far is the usa who are not in the commonwealth
as regards why we feel joining the commonwealth is a sign of inferiority complex , well the way i see it , the ony reason to join is to show how much we like the british , why would we feel the need to be part of such a club , i dont know0 -
-
-
-
I wager your IP comes back the same as one of the other posters in this threadPaddieslol wrote: »lol, This has made my day finding this thread. So you Irish guys want to become part of the Commonwealth. hmmm... maybe if you kiss our Queen's ass, say sorry for your foolishness and ingratitude for leaving the UK and thank us for allowing you to do so in the first place, then maybe we'll think about it. 0 -
Fair enough, but the Australians are a terrible example of how to envisage ones nation as independent. Perchance you see things differently, but I would call putting anothers flag on yours, mandating a foreign ceremonial figure as head of state, and using said figures image and seal on official documents, as subservience to that foreign power.We have countless examples of buildings (and indeed post boxes!) in this republic with the royal insignia on. Are we subservient to the United Kingdom because of these legacy symbols? So you think Australians are subservient to the UK because of similar british symbols which they have also failed to remove from their country. Fair enough. What about South Africa then? Have you ever met any big south africans and told them that they're subservient to the UK? Best of luck doing that.
We did a better job cutting the proverbial apron strings than the Aussies - like having our ceremonial figurehead (the President) actually having some connection with this jurisdiction.
Yes, it is principle. The British Commonwealth is an ancient relic of nations who are primarily ex-British colonies, and who identify themselves as such. It would at best be a pointless talking shop for Ireland, at worst, a pathetic throwback to remember the "good old days" 19th Century.Would that be ok or is it purely a 'principle' thing with those against it?
The only thing that would convince me that it's OK to seriously discuss entering the British Commonwealth would be if Britain were to leave it. Then it might make sense to say that the Commonwealth is actually something other than a grouping of the UK and its ex-colonies.
But - and that will never happen because - that would kind of defeat the whole purpose!
I was thinking primarily of Eamon O'Cuiv when I wrote that. And I make no apologies for any implications of that!You think it's pointless but I won't call you a muppet or a gombeen man for holding that opinion Sean. I won't call you any silly names in fact.0 -
Advertisement
-
I got an infraction(whatever that is) for playfully suggesting Chess Player was trolling (it was after all what he suggested i and others were doing in the first place), it was just a light dig, actually a very light dig considering what he called me. :eek:. I was pretty restrained in my response I thought tbh.
'The West Brit' element was hard enough to stomach imo but that takes the biscuit.
Anyway I hope you all solve Ireland's and The World's problems here. Good Luck.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement