In the event of united Ireland could DUP attract a significant vote in the Republic / 26 Counties ?

You can own as many bits of the culture you want.

You cannot disown the culture of the place you live in though. We are a multi-faceted culture, always were and always will be. When you are dead and gone the things you didn't like or indeed liked will still be going on and a part of the an ever changing cultural life.
Like every other country in the world.

The bladder is an organ.

Far from meaningless, it's quite important.

Charming. When you speak like that to a relatively neutral Irish person like blanch152, we can only guess how welcome you would make the DUP or indeed people who have a British background - or not as Irish as you like them to be - in to a U.I.

It reminds me of Billy Fox, the FG politician murdered by the IRA in Co. Monaghan. Before that he was insulted with similar anti-British smears (eg that he was ex B-specials, which was totally untrue) in the Dail by a Few FF TDs whio were forced to apologise. Billy Fox was only a very soft Republican, not an IRA sympathiser. And the OP in his / her innocence thought a hypothetical UI would be a safe place for a DUP politician to stand! How absurd and naive.

So the English’ have a culture but ours is a là carte and only what an individual accepts?

Really been a revealing conversation.

I'm not the person who ridicules those who follow English teams nor those who enjoy aspects of other cultures or tells them they aren't Irish.

That openness is a part of 'our culture' and always has been back as far as you want to go. Again nobody is 'imposing' a thing on you, you are free to like/dislike whatever aspect of our culture that you want to.

You exclude - i.e Wolfe Tones/Orange marches from your cultural identity, I don't. That's the difference. You are exclusionary, I'm inclusive.

Just as you, blanch and I are responsible for what they post, so too is Irish History. If he/she had engaged me on anything I posted he/she would have been answered. Blanch and you engage with my posts, therefore I have responded.

You should be able to tell that somebody who includes all aspects of cultural activity here and influences from outside (British and American and other European) as a part of 'our culture' would not subscribe to 'Irish History's' views.

So totally wrong.

Everything practiced culturally is a part of 'our' collective culture as long as it isn't illegal or contrary to human rights.

There is nothing to stop a governing party adopting your exclusionary a lá carte attitude (including SF btw) and that is wholly wrong.

Who said or claimed that all cultural aspects need to be 'shared'? That's pure rubbish from the get go and happens nowhere.

No culture anywhere EVER 'shared' all aspects. It's a completely moot point therefore concocted in your ongoing attempts to exclude.

Morris Dancing isn't 'shared' by everyone in England - is it a part of English culture…of course it is.

You are talking absolute nonsense now tbh.

The notion of "native Gaels" is nonsensical anyway. The Vikings, Normans, etc etc who came over here and settled weren't sterile!

An opinion. Could turn out differently.

quoting sluggerotoole.com - jaysus. even more 'reliable' than the Indo

@FrancieBrady there's a large element of "mom's apple pie" in those polls.

Of course a lot of people are in favour of a united Ireland - in the abstract.

Once things start becoming clearer about what they will have to give up to get it, what it will cost them, and what security risks it will entail then we'll start to see how much real support there is.

Article in the Sunday Times at the weekend, quoting a Department of Social Protection report that integration of the social welfare systems will cost €22bn per year in the event of a united Ireland.

Various cheaper alternatives would require cuts in rates for some people.

It is interesting that this work has been done. Hopefully, it will be published so people will get a sense of the increased taxation that a united Ireland would bring.

Varadkar doubling down on his views.
There are many including myself, who have said there is a change in attitude happening and this is a manifestation of it.
There will be a phase of denying no doubt but the momentum continues.

I guess some people don't subscribe to jobs at any cost to your principles.

If you are anti war or neutral, then be that.
Being a First Minister For All' does not mean being dishonest.

Contrast this stance to a Green stance on LNG plants? Should we not welcome the employment and benefits of an LNG plant? Is it 'a necessary evil'?

I don't necessarily agree with her position or the Green one, but they have a right to express their views.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, MoN and a large part of who she represents do not see those they remember as 'terrorists' as Gavin Robinson and those he represents don't see the BA and Loyalists as 'terrorists' or Michael Martin and who he represents don't see those who fought for our freedom as 'terrorists'. They all terrorised people here at various times.

Sooner or later the conversation on 'how do you allow people to commemorate their dead' has to be and will be had.

She hasn't blocked the jobs. She has given an opinion on the jobs and what is being produced. Every other leader in the free world 'gives their opinion' including her partner in office, who is doing and saying what she believes is the right thing. Same as any other party leader will do on their core principles. That is why I mentioned the Greens, it is not whataboutery to say that. It's a statement of actual fact.

Robinson & Martin are not the First Minister celebrating terrorists whose victims are still suffering from the acts of those terrorists. Again you are just deflecting from MON's inability to be an impartial leader or one who can empathise with the victims and their ongoing suffering.

Robinson and his predecessors have not even owned up to their party's involvement in 'terror' and militant organisations, does not call out similar memorials in his own community and of course celebrates the BA every single year. All of whom created 'victims' too. FF and FG had no issues celebrating those who terrorised and killed when victims were still alive and suffering. That is what happens after all major conflicts and wars.

The 'FM for all' is an attempt to begin healing some of that divide, and has been partially successful, it is not and never was going to be a 'capitulation' to viewing things through a Unionist or British lens.

It's still a divided society, and as one, still has much work to be done. Part of that is getting to a place where both sides can remember with respect and empathy.

which is part of her job as First Minister.

Where does it say this in her job description? This is again signs that you don't fully understand what the NI Assembly/Executive is, it is not an autonomous 'government' like we have. These jobs have not come as a result of what a 'government' of NI wanted. They have come because of something the actual government of the UK wants. She gave her opinion on that, as Little-Pengelly will give her opinion on i.e. the Westminster imposed Protocol etc

Again with the whataboutery - we're not talking about Robinson because he is not the FM!

Ok, apply the same comment to ELP, the deputy FM.

MON wants to take a stand against the US turning its back on Ukraine

SF are making a stand against Trumps intentions for Gaza.

but it is clear that she does not want Ukraine to get help from Europe if it means that the defence mechanisms are manufactured in NI.
She is happy to celebrate her war against the British. She is just against every other war?
She is a hypocrite and yet again showing that she is unfit for the role as FM.

She said:

 the focus of the international community "should always be to work towards negotiation and peace settlements".

She represents a party and a community that has been able to do that.

A 'FM for all' includes speaking for her own community which is a part of that 'all'.
A 'deputy FM for all' would accept that and speak for her part of the 'all'.
Nobody is issuing a block or a decree or a petition of concern on this. The Assembly is a place for opinions/views to be expressed.

I guess you were not listening when she defined what she meant by a FM for all.
She is expressing an opinion as all party leaders do in the Assembly. Those who think

the focus of the international community "should always be to work towards negotiation and peace settlements".

do not just come from 'one' community. they come form all across society in NI, Nationalist, Unionist and neither, just as they do here.

Not for the first time, you see this as a slight on the Unionist community, the fear of offending the community you believe must not be offended strikes deep in the partitionist heart.

What O'Neill has gone out of her way to do in reaching out to that 'community' in other ways is second to none in NI political life. But of course you don't have the charity to see that.