|
Post by hibernicus on Aug 19, 2011 11:02:28 GMT
Monday's IRISH TIMES reports that the possible independent presidential candidate Mary Davis spoke at the recent demonstration by the NOISE organisation campaigning for "marriage equality for gays and lesbians etc" - in other words for the abolition of marriage by declaring that rather than an union between one man and one woman open to procreation, a type of union preceding the state and independent of it, marriage is a mere creature of the state which can define it as it pleases. Ms Davis' association with this harmful campaign, which the IRISH TIMES promotes with the sort of reverential tones and extended coverage it denies to pro-life demonstrations, should simplify matters for any pro-family voters who were thinking of giving her a preference.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 21, 2011 23:27:41 GMT
The IRISH SUN of 21 September headlines Sinead O'Connor declaring that Dana's presidential candidacy is a joke. This is rather rich from the whilom Mother Bernadette, who can't recognise a joke when she sees one looking at her in the mirror every morning.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 27, 2011 16:57:46 GMT
I have been reading through some old papers and I notice the SUNDAY BUSINESS POST of 11 October has a profile of Mary Davis which notes that she has publicly expressed pro-life view and criticises her for showing insufficient sympathy for women who "have" to take the boat to England (i.e. any opposition to abortion is presented as being cruel to women who have abortions). This puts matters concerning Ms Davis in a whole different light. I still criticise her apparent position on gay "marriage" but I would support a pro-life candidate (even one favouring gay marriage) over a pro-abort, and the fact that she is being attacked for expressing pro-life views entitles her to some share of support. My personal recommendations at this stage are: Vote No. 1 for Dana (obvious) No.2 for Mary Davis No. 3 for Gay Mitchell (because he is also being attacked for being pro-life, and a defeat for him by a liberal candidate would be "spun" as due to his "conservatism". He would be no.2 if it wasn't for Inda's Pope-bashing. No.4 for Sean Gallagher about whom I know nothing (subject to revision) No.5 for Michael D higgins No.6 for David Norris if he is nominated, because sodomy is less serious than multiple murder No.7 for MArtin Mcguinness (see comment re David Norris)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2011 23:36:13 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2011 5:53:36 GMT
I also disagree with you on the sodomy vs murder front by the way, for McGuinness as far as we're aware is not still killing people and encouraging teenagers to join the IRA but Norris is still living a homosexual lifestyle and will seek to promote it if elected. Homosexuality slashes at the heart of family life, kill the family and you kill a country. He is living an openly sinful life and proud of it. It's a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea, but I'd rather take my chances with the sea on that front.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 28, 2011 11:20:34 GMT
HEre's the link to the Mary Davis story, and I have pasted in the specific reference to abortion. I daresay she is flawed but we have to take the best we can get. www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/story.aspx-qqqt=AGENDA-qqqs=agenda-qqqid=58548-qqqx=1.aspEXTRACT We can have all the legislation we like, but if we aren’t able to change the hearts and minds of the people, we won’t achieve anything.” While this sort of statement might secure the feminists’ vote, not every stance she takes on ‘‘women’s issues’ would garner such approval. Like fellow candidate Gay Mitchell, Davis has adopted a socially conservative pro-life stance to the issue of abortion. She attracted criticism in the press recently when she articulated a strong pro-life position without showing an understanding of the position of those women who feel compelled to travel to Britain to avail of terminations. Because abortion is a constitutional issue, Davis if president would have the ability to hold up legislation by referring bills on the matter to the Council of State and Supreme Court if they challenged her personal pro-life views. ‘‘I know it is not a black and white issue, but I believe that any child that is conceived should be welcomed wholeheartedly into this world,” she says. ‘‘I do believe that. Having worked with disability all my life I have seen the contribution and importance of life, and the joy and optimism and hope that it brings into other people’s lives. What I struggle with is when a woman has been raped or abused . . . in that scenario you have to look towards the mother’s welfare. That is in the Constitution, but there is no legislation surrounding it. ‘‘I would like to see discussion and debate surrounding the area of abortion in Ireland, and then legislation brought forward . . . and then let’s see what happens in relation to that. ‘‘Again, I’m a mother. I can see the joy any child can bring, but I also see that the opportunities need to be there for them. We often debate this at home. Say two babies are born in the Rotunda and one comes out and turns right and leads one life, and the other comes out and turns left and leads another - how do we make their lives more equal? And I think it’s all about creating support systems, creating opportunities. What you do with them then is a different matter.”... END OF EXTRACT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 29, 2011 22:38:12 GMT
The new issue of the CATHOLIC VOICE has a form for readers who wish to donate to the Dana for President campaign, together with an explanation of the legal requirements involved (e.g. no anonymous donations above a certain amount, donations above a certain amount must be officially reported and will be made public, etc).
|
|
|
Post by humphrey on Sept 30, 2011 13:06:22 GMT
Despite Senator Norris' successful return to the race his campaign is severely damaged. He has lost the support of the people you would most expect to support him. Senator Van Turnhout, one Enda's nominees and strong supporter of the Oireachtas resolution against the Vatican, was on the verge of tears recounting the abuse meted out by some of his supports trying to secure an Oireachtas signature. This liberal blogger is disillusioned with his campaign. www.mamanpoulet.com/the-culture-of-entitlement-and-aras11/His interview on the Prime Times last Wednesday has left many people unimpressed. He seems erratic. Many are beginning to notice he can be quite pompous. Together with the on going controversy surrounding the letters, I don't believe that he can win the race. At the moment I am leaning towards giving Gay Mitchell my no. 1. I doubt that he agrees with Enda's Dail speech and as President he may be able to influence government on this and other issues. He has stated that he wants a society that tolerates all views. Even views such as ours. He has a well developed philosophy that he often repeats. He is also a experienced politician. Dana no. 2 Mary Davies No.3 for her strong pro-life stance. Michael Gallagher No. 4 He is probably doing his utmost to avoid controversial issues such as abortion. But that would be better than active supporters destruction unborn human individuals. Senator Norris has stated in the past that he is 'pro-life'. I'm not familiar with Norris' position on the life issues but I doubt that his understanding is the same as the Pope's. Micheal D has in past has treated any suggestion that the Labour is pro abortion as black propaganda. Again I'm not familiar with labour's position.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Oct 10, 2011 20:13:40 GMT
If I believe the last poll, the three contenders are Sean Gallagher, Martin McGuinness and Michael D Higgins, with Higgins ahead.
Labour are the only establishment party committed to legislating for abortion. Sinn Féin at best fudges the issue. Sean Gallagher has been doing his best to dodge making any commitment.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 11, 2011 12:57:29 GMT
I notice the IRISH TIMES today is reporting Michael D Higgins brushing off an accusation by Dana that he is pro-abortion; of course the IRISH TIMES does not mention Labour Party policy on this issue nor does it ask Higgins about his views - it simply treats the whole thing as a smear. (Notice by the way how when the abortion issue is raised the liberal media always treats it as being untrue/irrelevant without clarifying the difference- so that the unwary may think the accusation is untrue whereas what the media commentator means is that its truth is irrelevant because it ought not to influence an election. I remember this tactic being used in Mary Robinson's 1990 election.) Here are a couple of earlier posts from this thread in which Labour's 'pro-choice' policy is referenced. The first notes a homosexual secularist on Politics.ie saying he will not vote Labor precisely because it is "pro-choice": Re: Election 2011 « Reply #29 on Feb 11, 2011, 3:24pm » I must say that this post is in one sense refreshing since it shows a basic desire to protect human life surviving the loss of religious faith - but I suspect such views will wane as it sinks into a secularising provincial Ireland how intimately the agenda of "sexual liberation" is linked to and requires abortion. (The fact that this poster is gay may, oddly, have helped to insulate him from this since his vices do not involve the possibility of "unwanted pregnancy".) EXTRACT updev Politics.ie Newbie Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 74 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote: Originally Posted by cricket Thanks Mr. Quinn , the best propogandist Labour has had in years. Any hope that Dana might cut loose shortly ? I disagree. Quinn clearly comes across as a right wing fundamentalist homophobic bigot and no doubt he is. As such I just ignore his rantings on everything from gay marriage to catholic doctrine as I would those of any fool. He does however raise the issue of Labour's support for abortion and this is significant. As a hugely disaffected FF member, I was committed to working for and voting for Labour for well over a year now. Because of their support for abortion, I will now be voting for FG and FF while Labour won't be getting as much as a preference. I'm young, gay, liberal, anti-death penalty, campaigned for divorce and have zero interest in anything the catholic church has to say. Abortion, however, is a red line issue for me and many like me. If you think that absolutely all pro-life people are bible bashing bigots then you are making a big mistake. Outside of the Pale, this matters, and Labour's vote will suffer. END Here is ROry Fitzgerald's IRISH CATHOLIC article from February on Labour's strong links to the pro-abortion group Choice Ireland, which is dominated by Labour activists (though this does not mean the party as a whole shares their views, of course): www.irishcatholic.ie/site/content/labours-extreme-pro-abortion-wing-rory-fitzgeraldAnd here is what the parties said to Choice Ireland www.choiceireland.org/node/60Labour has a very long and complicated response but these are the final paragraphs: EXTRACT ...."Our view on that basis is that it is open to the Oireachtas to amend the criminal law so as to exempt from the punishment provided for in the Offences against the Person Act 1861 medical procedures carried out with the aim of protecting a woman’s physical health from a significant risk posed by the continuation of the pregnancy and procedures carried out to terminate a pregnancy which, by reason of foetal abnormality as in the de Barra situation, could never result in a live birth. "We accept that the above approach might appear to diverge from existing jurisprudence, in particular the distinction between life and health drawn by Chief Justice Finlay in the X Case, albeit not as a binding part of his judgment. However, as we have pointed out, the X Case was decided in a complete legislative vacuum. The enactment of legislation to reconcile the various constitutional values involved would fundamentally change the context in which the courts would consider the issue, and in that changed context we are of the view that the narrow reading given to the constitutional provision in the absence of such legislation would no longer be decisive. "In summary, the Labour Party is committed to bringing forward legislation, under the current constitutional position, to provide for the availability of a termination of pregnancy in the cases of: • A risk to the life of the woman, including the risk of suicide • Foetal abnormality which is such that the foetus will never be born alive. • A risk of significant injury to the physical health of the mother. "In the event of a constitutional challenge to any of this legislation being upheld, the Labour Party would then consider such constitutional options as would then arise in the light of any judgment. " END
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 11, 2011 13:03:30 GMT
As regards the election, my advice would still be to vote No. 1 for Dana because the size of her vote (which is pretty certain to be down on 1997) will be treated as indicating the strength of "conservative" opinion, and the weaker she is the more it will be treated as a mandate for the liberal agenda. No.2 should go to Gay Mitchell for the same reason - then give no. 3 to Davis and no.4 to Gallagher or if you prefer give no.3 to Gallagher. I would not vote for MCGuinness for obvious reasons, so if we want to keep Higgins out it has to be Gallagher - but STV allows us to use our higher preferences to indicate the level of support for candidates who have made pro-life or "Christian Democrat" noises, which Gallagher so far as I know has not, and still transfer to Gallagher as against Higgins. Of course this is a case of voting for the least worst, and we have to keep an eye out for developments. Don't forget also that polls can be self-fulfilling prophecies and be wary.
|
|
|
Post by Beinidict Ó Niaidh on Oct 16, 2011 20:20:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 17, 2011 19:58:49 GMT
I notice the CSP has announced it is un-endorsing Gay Mitchell on the grounds that in last night's debate he sided with the "gay agenda" and disavowed Alveda King's views on the subject. This has been picked up by the IRISH TIMES, which jeeringly suggested losing CSP support would HELP Mitchell. This is odd in three different ways: (1) I believe Richard Greene had already stated in the CATHOLIC VOICE before the debate that he now supports Dana (2) It was always clear that Mitchell wasn't on board with us about everything - the case for him was that a lukewarm candidate was better than a red-hot liberal a la Norris. (3) Once more, this shows that the CSP/Greene went overboard when they issued their original statement with its fanfaronade about how thousands of pro-lifers would work for Mitchell and get him elected if he was chosen instead of Cox. Those sort of promises ought not to be made unless you have a clear idea of where the candidate stands, and are prepared to stand by him to the end. I fear Dana's meltdown is not only tragic for her and her family - it will do further damage to the pro-life/pro-family cause. The smaller her vote, the less attention the politicians will feel they have to pay to that cause. Give her what support you can, and transfer to the candidates who are least objectionable.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 18, 2011 21:03:04 GMT
I don't know where he got the story that Dev offered to create an Irish monarchy in 1936/7 - it seems extremely unlikely. There was an O'Brien fantasist calling himself Prince of Thomond who hung around the place in the 40s and 50s so I suspect this is one of his fantasies. Dev fought the Civil War to have a Republic and chose to have the President directly elected (even though this sort of ceremonial president is usually elected by parliament in other countries - only presidents with real executive power are chosen directly by the people) to emphasise that power came from the Irish people and not the British Crown, so any form of monarchy would be incompatible with this (not to mention that it would have been more difficult to remove a monarch than a president if he proved troublesome or otherwise unsuitable). He is right that the presidency is a strange office and that in some ways its ceremonial role might be better fulfilled by a monarch, but that is not the sort of thing you can invent out of nowhere - it would just look silly. Who would we get? The O'Conor Don, who I think is a Jesuit in Zimbabwe? A Spanish O'Donnell? One of the miscellaneous Grimaldis with their Kelly descent - now THAT would certainly keep the tabloids busy? A junior Windsor? Personally, I would favour a move in the other direction - a real separation of powers and an executive president like the Americans have. It might lead to the legislature bcoming more than a rubber-stamp for the executive, than it is at present.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 19, 2011 20:45:31 GMT
There was a small monarchist movement in the 1930s in which Francis Stuart was active. They found a stray O'Neill as claimant and engaged in desultory discussions about a coup d'etat. nothing came of this and the stray O'Neill emigrated to Britain in search of work - the whole thing should be taken as seriously as anything else that had Francis Stuart attached to it. The problem with discussing historical support for monarchy/republic is that republicanism was regarded as synonymous with a fully sovereign Ireland, so that it amounted to being for or against a continuing link with Britain. Sinn Fein expressly campaigned as a republican party in the 1918 election (this is one reason why the anti-Treatyites denounced the continuing link with the crown as a sell-out). The British army pre-1914 was indeed disproportionately recruited from Ireland, highland Scotland, and the urban poor - this is what tends to happen in an all-volunteer army (just as today the US Army is disproportionately black, Hispanic and Appalachian). BTW the argument that Irish recruitment to the British Army indicated Irish support for the Crown was quite widely used by Unionists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but it certainly didn't translate into unionist votes outside of Ulster. Monarchism in the present-day Irish context is a dead duck.
|
|