Refugee Family Reunification

Diddumz

Diddumz wrote: »

Even ignoring the poll here, I just cant fathom that the people of Ireland want this to happen.

So why is it happening?

Because most of us don't have the charisma to swing a crowd, the patience to deal with the media, the restraint to accept abuse from SJWs and the leverage (blackmail, money, etc) to force the career politicians into supporting changes that might put their jobs at risk.

I'd suggest that most Irish people are content to say that Ireland will always be different from the rest of Europe and that we won't have to experience the problems of multiculturalism or radicalization. And they could be right. I doubt it, but it's possible.

Help!!!!

Diddumz wrote: »

I agree with the sentiment. But overall its just a way of saying "its difficult".

It is difficult. But theres change in the air, when you group all common international problems together and take a sniff of it, its past its sell by date already.

Difficulty versus necessity, necessity will come out on top.

People outside of major cities are getting tired of the main political parties, we have seen that in Europe. Change is coming & will come:D

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

and rightly so. religious discrimination has no place, it gets nobody anywhere.

Um... how would we know? We haven't tried implementing any restrictions on Islam... or any other religion. You're just saying that by rote.

discrimination is never positive as it can't be. otherwise it wouldn't be classed as discrimination and protected by law.

Um.. 'discrimination is never positive as it can't be'. Great! No room for discussion. No compromise. Okie dokie.

Who determines what discrimination consists of?

ireland already expects those immigrating here to have a skill that the country is lacking in, it's not classed as discrimination because it's not.
there is a difference between immigration, and the various refugee programs.

There's no difference when they're gaining citizenship, and staying...

everything is ultimately put to a referendum. at election time. if people don't read the political parties manifesto that is their issue.

Everything? Um.. Not really everything. Referendums being related to the constitution, yes?,.... and the government can make quite a few changes to the law without consulting the public.

And the party manifesto? Lol. When have they kept to that? Once they're in office, they can do pretty much whatever they wish until the next election. Rinse and repeat.

Diddumz

Diddumz wrote: »

I agree with the sentiment. But overall its just a way of saying "its difficult".

It is difficult. But theres change in the air, when you group all common international problems together and take a sniff of it, its past its sell by date already.

Difficulty versus necessity, necessity will come out on top.

Remember the Banking crash? Bailing the banks, and the government reaction? Remember the outrage and almost tangible anger in the air? Didn't last long beyond the men complaining in the pubs and the various political parties throwing insults at each other.

That ended my belief of the Irish people being capable of staying together long enough to enact real change of political, legal and financial systems in Ireland.

Help!!!!

Diddumz wrote: »

Oh I get where youre coming from, no doubt about it!

Its all about stringing people along, JUST about letting them have enough so as they wont complain or do anything about it.

That's what I meant about necessity versus difficulty. When they were harping on about not having enough money in 2009/2010 for another couple weeks of social welfare.....that was very close to being a true turning point, and its genuinely a loss that it didn't occur.

People were drip-fed the bare minimum to keep in line, and they did. And our present country is the result of it, inequality on the rise like a rocket.

But it cant continue. An average house cant keep going up in price forever, we cant keep relying on foreign countries forever, and we cant keep ignoring our own shortfalls by patching them with imported labour. Its a bubble, it will burst, and we'll get another shot at changing things for the better.

Might as well flip a coin as to whether we'll take the next chance, but its definitely on the way.

The EU will dismantle in the next few years & will leave the clowns scratching their heads as to what to do & why no one told them. They will then all jump ship like the rats that they are & leave the rest of us to fight for crumbs

Odhinn

PeterParker957 wrote: »

They allow "brothers" events and "sisters" events encouraging segregation.

Freshers week was 100% dry for the first time ever..

Lectures cannot be scheduled between 12pm and 2pm on Friday.

All food is halal whether you want it or not.

The Islamic Society removed the GLASS Socs posters and wanted them removed..

Other than you saying so, there's no evidence any of the above took place. Theres been quite detailed claims about the RCSI before, and they were shown to be crap, so unless you've some proof, I'd suggest dropping it.

You previously claimed the LBGT society was banned, and there is no indication of that.

Odhinn

Help!!!! wrote: »

People outside of major cities are getting tired of the main political parties, we have seen that in Europe. Change is coming & will come:D

So are you now again stating that the NP will win seats or is this more "sarcasm"?

Why do you support a "catholic" party while decrying attempts to enshrine religion in legislation?

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

Um... how would we know?

30 years of people blowing each other up in the north of our country because of religious discrimination by "government" would tell us a lot.

Deleted User wrote: »

We haven't tried implementing any restrictions on Islam... or any other religion. You're just saying that by rote.

yeah. because there would be no point in trying such nonsense. for a start how are you going to tell they are muslim? by the fact they are brown? well, that isn't reliable seeing as there are white muslims. by asking them their religion? well, chances are they will have heard that ireland is restricting people because "muslim" so they will just give another religion. you haven't thought this through. not to worry, that was to be expected.

Deleted User wrote: »

Um.. 'discrimination is never positive as it can't be'. Great! No room for discussion. No compromise. Okie dokie.

correct. discrimination is discrimination.

Deleted User wrote: »

Who determines what discrimination consists of?

those in favour of good human rights, + the law.

Deleted User wrote: »

There's no difference when they're gaining citizenship, and staying...

there is a difference between people immigrating here, and the refugee programs.

Deleted User wrote: »

Everything? Um.. Not really everything. Referendums being related to the constitution, yes?,.... and the government can make quite a few changes to the law without consulting the public.

And the party manifesto? Lol. When have they kept to that? Once they're in office, they can do pretty much whatever they wish until the next election. Rinse and repeat.

you vote for policies at election time. the manifesto outlines the policies. if you like the policies, you vote for that party. if you don't, you don't vote for that party. if you vote for a party and they don't keep to the policies you want, you don't vote for them again. simple and basic stuff.

PeterParker957

Odhinn wrote: »

PeterParker957 wrote: »

They allow "brothers" events and "sisters" events encouraging segregation.

Freshers week was 100% dry for the first time ever..

Lectures cannot be scheduled between 12pm and 2pm on Friday.

All food is halal whether you want it or not.

The Islamic Society removed the GLASS Socs posters and wanted them removed..

Other than you saying so, there's no evidence any of the above took place. Theres been quite detailed claims about the RCSI before, and they were shown to be crap, so unless you've some proof, I'd suggest dropping it.

You previously claimed the LBGT society was banned, and there is no indication of that.

You'd be happy for someone to lose their job to prove a point you'd just deny anyway.

Galwayguy35

If the aim is for them to only stay a while then there is no reason for the rest of the family to come over.

The simple answer is none of them have any intention of ever going back.

They will avail of all the free services that working people who were born here have to pay for and bide their time until they get citizenship.

Odhinn

PeterParker957 wrote: »

You'd be happy for someone to lose their job to prove a point you'd just deny anyway.

.....if these measures occurred, there'd be some trace of them. You have shown none, at all, whatsoever.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

30 years of people blowing each other up in the north of our country because of religious discrimination by "government" would tell us a lot.

There's quite a bit of difference between religious discrimination on a domestic population vs immigrants who are seeking to enter our borders from countries external to Europe.

As I said before, black and white. There's no middle ground on some issues.

yeah. because there would be no point in trying such nonsense. for a start how are you going to tell they are muslim? by the fact they are brown? well, that isn't reliable seeing as there are white muslims. by asking them their religion? well, chances are they will have heard that ireland is restricting people because "muslim" so they will just give another religion. you haven't thought this through. not to worry, that was to be expected.

Hilarious. You ask and answer your own questions thereby creating the frame. How very liberal of you. :rolleyes:

I'm more of the mind that we place restrictions on Muslims within our countries and that we monitor their behavior within our own borders. That their religious laws are not allowed, their religious practices would be limited to the privacy of their own homes, and they would be obliged to integrate with the local culture.

I'm not against Muslims being in Europe, as long as they're willing to integrate and not expect religious/cultural aspects (like sharia law, child marriage, multiple wives etc) to be allowed. If they campaign for change to bring in those things, they should be warned, and if they persist, then expelled.

I find it interesting that their countries of origin have strict laws regarding the behavior of foreigners especially with regards to religious practices... but it's terrible that some suggest we should have similar conditions here.

correct. discrimination is discrimination.

Black and white. Nothing in-between. No room for improvement or change.

those in favour of good human rights, + the law.

Ahh... Right. Gotcha.

there is a difference between people immigrating here, and the refugee programs.

Yup. Immigrants have to meet necessary requirements for entry. Refugee programs bypass those immigration requirements.

you vote for policies at election time. the manifesto outlines the policies. if you like the policies, you vote for that party. if you don't, you don't vote for that party. if you vote for a party and they don't keep to the policies you want, you don't vote for them again. simple and basic stuff.

Lol. ok. I'm not going to get into a political debate about the parties. Stick to immigration and refugees.

Odhinn

Deleted User wrote: »

I find it interesting that their countries of origin have strict laws regarding the behavior of foreigners especially with regards to religious practices... but it's terrible that some suggest we should have similar conditions here.

.

You think we should restrict religous practices?

Odhinn

Odhinn wrote: »

You think we should restrict religous practices?

I think public displays of religion should be restricted. Oh, and yes... I do think Sharia law and other similar religious laws shouldn't be allowed in any shape or form.

Odhinn

Deleted User wrote: »

I think public displays of religion should be restricted.

eg.....?

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

There's quite a bit of difference between religious discrimination on a domestic population vs immigrants who are seeking to enter our borders from countries external to Europe.

there isn't. discrimination against people because catholic is as disgusting as discrimination against people because muslim.

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm more of the mind that we place restrictions on Muslims within our countries and that we monitor their behavior within our own borders. That their religious laws are not allowed, their religious practices would be limited to the privacy of their own homes, and they would be obliged to integrate with the local culture.

grand, as long as we place the same restrictions on all other religions including catholicism. so no more "catholic" schools for example, and no more laws based on the catholic religion in our constitution. otherwise i can only suggest that such restrictions would be imposed to specifically target muslims because muslims.

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not against Muslims being in Europe, as long as they're willing to integrate and not expect religious/cultural aspects (like sharia law, child marriage, multiple wives etc) to be allowed.

how big of you.

Deleted User wrote: »

If they campaign for change to bring in those things, they should be warned, and if they persist, then expelled.

so democracy only for you then. lovely. what if they are european muslims, where are you going to expel them to if they dare to campaign for something you don't like?
sharia law and child marriages are illegal anyway so there would be no point in them campaigning for them, seeing as they won't have much support, they won't be made legal, and child marriage isn't really a muslim specific issue anyway.

[/QUOTE]I find it interesting that their countries of origin have strict laws regarding the behavior of foreigners especially with regards to religious practices... but it's terrible that some suggest we should have similar conditions here.[/QUOTE]

absolutely. i want to live in a democratic country. if i was the type that wanted to live in a country that has restrictions on some sections of people that don't apply to others because i don't like them, then i will go live in a theocracy. if that is what you want, consider going to live in a theocracy yourself, and they will be able to meet your requirements.

splinter65

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think public displays of religion should be restricted. Oh, and yes... I do think Sharia law and other similar religious laws shouldn't be allowed in any shape or form.

That’s interesting. What do you consider a public display of religion, who will police people, and what will be a typical punishment?

Ulysses Gaze

end of the road wrote: »

you vote for policies at election time. the manifesto outlines the policies. if you like the policies, you vote for that party. if you don't, you don't vote for that party. if you vote for a party and they don't keep to the policies you want, you don't vote for them again. simple and basic stuff.

And yet people will go back and vote for the same shower of gob****es who broke their promises and then complain again when they do the same again.

Like Bart Simpson trying to grab that Cupcake....

Army_of_One

Have to laugh at the scumbags championing the National Party...Justin Barret ffs lol

Ulysses Gaze

Army_of_One wrote: »

Have to laugh at the scumbags championing the National Party...Justin Barret ffs lol

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

there isn't. discrimination against people because catholic is as disgusting as discrimination against people because muslim.

The difference in that it's discrimination against people originally of that country vs people coming externally in the present day. Those in the North had little choice in the matter, whereas those immigrants do have a choice.

Doesn't matter. You don't see a difference. I do. It's fine to have a difference of opinion.

grand, as long as we place the same restrictions on all other religions including catholicism. so no more "catholic" schools for example, and no more laws based on the catholic religion in our constitution. otherwise i can only suggest that such restrictions would be imposed to specifically target muslims because muslims.

I'm perfectly happy with that. I don't see a place for religion in society anymore except to be practiced in peoples homes or places of worship.

how big of you.

You asked. I answered. :rolleyes:

so democracy only for you then. lovely. what if they are european muslims, where are you going to expel them to if they dare to campaign for something you don't like?

I'd expel them to an Islamic country since, after all, that's the environment they want to live in.

Ahh... I understand now. You have no problem with European people being forced to live under Sharia law if Muslims manage to gain enough support and get it passed legally. After all, that's democracy...

sharia law and child marriages are illegal anyway so there would be no point in them campaigning for them, seeing as they won't have much support, they won't be made legal, and child marriage isn't really a muslim specific issue anyway.

Laws can be changed given enough support. Between a higher birth rate, and an amazing number of liberal westerners supporting their 'rights', they could swing it. Not immediately, but in two generations?

But, hey, that's someone else's problem, isn't it?

absolutely. i want to live in a democratic country. if i was the type that wanted to live in a country that has restrictions on some sections of people that don't apply to others because i don't like them, then i will go live in a theocracy. if that is what you want, consider going to live in a theocracy yourself, and they will be able to meet your requirements.

Then it's a good thing that I'm not suggesting restrictions on people because I don't like them... I'm suggesting restrictions because those that want to come to Europe to embrace our cultures will continue to come here, and increases the chance that those who want to live by the traditional or radical Islamic creed will go elsewhere.

Although I do find it interesting that since I disagree with you, then I should consider leaving to live in a theocracy. So, you are willing to push some people out if they're against your belief... Just not if it's on religious grounds. A difference of opinion is enough...

splinter65

splinter65 wrote: »

That’s interesting. What do you consider a public display of religion, who will police people, and what will be a typical punishment?

Public displays? hmm.. Religious appearance & Clothing.

As for the rest, I dunno. I don't have a grand master plan.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd expel them to an Islamic country since, after all, that's the environment they want to live in.

but they are european, so it can't be done.

Deleted User wrote: »

Ahh... I understand now. You have no problem with European people being forced to live under Sharia law if Muslims manage to gain enough support and get it passed legally. After all, that's democracy...

they won't get enough votes to get it passed. none of us want sharia law, and there will always be more of us then the few who may want it, so sharia law won't be happening.

Deleted User wrote: »

Laws can be changed given enough support. Between a higher birth rate, and an amazing number of liberal westerners supporting their 'rights', they could swing it. Not immediately, but in two generations?

won't happen. there won't be the support base for it.

Deleted User wrote: »

Although I do find it interesting that since I disagree with you, then I should consider leaving to live in a theocracy. So, you are willing to push some people out if they're against your belief... Just not if it's on religious grounds. A difference of opinion is enough...

i don't want to push anyone out. i just made a suggestion that may meet your needs. you are under no obligation to take it up.

splinter65

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Public displays? hmm.. Religious appearance & Clothing.

As for the rest, I dunno. I don't have a grand master plan.

So, I’m wearing a crucifix today around my neck on a rather long silver chain.
You don’t think that should be allowed.
No Star of David. No crescent moons.
Priests rabbis nuns imams vicars, pastors of every hue, none shall be allowed out in public in their choice of garb. Or maybe not allowed out at all.
Shall we build huge walls around every place of worship? Or knock them down in case you accidentally see people coming or going and are offended/afraid at the idea of a group of people gathering to pray to their god.
What about religious funeral processions? Ok? Not ok?
Are you offended by these things or afraid of these things?

JenovaProject

splinter65 wrote: »

So, I’m wearing a crucifix today around my neck on a rather long silver chain.
You don’t think that should be allowed.
No Star of David. No crescent moons.
Priests rabbis nuns imams vicars, pastors of every hue, none shall be allowed out in public in their choice of garb. Or maybe not allowed out at all.
Shall we build huge walls around every place of worship? Or knock them down in case you accidentally see people coming or going and are offended/afraid at the idea of a group of people gathering to pray to their god.
What about religious funeral processions? Ok? Not ok?
Are you offended by these things or afraid of these things?

Instead of the little silly insignificant things your proposing or the outrageous things youre proposing,we could start right now,here in this country by simply serving alcohol on good friday and fcuk the church and what they think.
Do you not think its better to reduce religious interference in civilised society?

splinter65

JenovaProject wrote: »

Instead of the little silly insignificant things your proposing or the outrageous things youre proposing,we could start right now,here in this country by simply serving alcohol on good friday and fcuk the church and what they think.
Do you not think its better to reduce religious interference in civilised society?

You don’t seem to know that the Good Friday alcohol ban has been lifted.
You would imagine if you feel so strongly about it that you would know that.
The poster I was addressing was suggesting that anyone displaying any religious allegiance would be breaking the law.
I take it you agree with him?

JenovaProject

splinter65 wrote: »

You don’t seem to know that the Good Friday alcohol ban has been lifted.
You would imagine if you feel so strongly about it that you would know that.
The poster I was addressing was suggesting that anyone displaying any religious allegiance would be breaking the law.
I take it you agree with him?

I dont feel strongly about it at all.
Seems its to happen next year by all accounts,like I said I dont feel strongly about it,just last good friday i couldnt drink because of religion...looks like next year on good friday ive freedom to do as i please.:)

I dont see the point in you arguing about silly things like crosses and outrageous things like building walls as a counter point to the increasing Islamic interference in civilised society as a whole.

In bold...Now why would you say something as stupid as that?

splinter65

JenovaProject wrote: »

I dont feel strongly about it at all.
Seems its to happen next year by all accounts,like I said I dont feel strongly about it,just last good friday i couldnt drink because of religion...looks like next year on good friday ive freedom to do as i please.:)

I dont see the point in you arguing about silly things like crosses and outrageous things like building walls as a counter point to the increasing Islamic interference in civilised society as a whole.

In bold...Now why would you say something as stupid as that?

I don’t think that someone who cried out in a post for the Good Friday alcohol ban to be lifted should call anyone else’s post “stupid”, really.

JenovaProject

splinter65 wrote: »

I don’t think that someone who cried out in a post for the Good Friday alcohol ban to be lifted should call anyone else’s post “stupid”, really.

I didnt call your post stupid.
Just that question.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

but they are european, so it can't be done.

they won't get enough votes to get it passed. none of us want sharia law, and there will always be more of us then the few who may want it, so sharia law won't be happening.

won't happen. there won't be the support base for it.

It can't be done because you simply say so. Falling European birth rates, a growing elderly group, and a much higher birth rate in Muslims has no impact on you...

I could point out that there are many groups or individuals like yourself who would protect their rights to full religious freedom... and nah. Not much point.

splinter65 wrote: »

So, I’m wearing a crucifix today around my neck on a rather long silver chain.
You don’t think that should be allowed.
No Star of David. No crescent moons.
Priests rabbis nuns imams vicars, pastors of every hue, none shall be allowed out in public in their choice of garb. Or maybe not allowed out at all.
Shall we build huge walls around every place of worship? Or knock them down in case you accidentally see people coming or going and are offended/afraid at the idea of a group of people gathering to pray to their god.
What about religious funeral processions? Ok? Not ok?
Are you offended by these things or afraid of these things?

Afraid? Have I offended you?

I'm not afraid or offended by religion. However, I do see it as an unnecessary point of conflict in society. With the rise of multiculturalism, I'd like to reduce the focus points for conflict and religion is probably the biggest influencer of that.