Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.

[Rossfan]

So are you saying we don't have to have a referendum to change an Bunreacht?

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Another group that seemed historically to have problems with our use of the name Ireland was Unionists. Unionists
claimed in the early years that the Republic robbed the name Ireland (Republic of Ireland), nothing ever stopped them calling Northern Ireland - Ireland (Kingdom of Ireland).

[lawnseed]

i'm not that worried about the name of the 26. what boils me most is "ulster" when they mean the 6 counties

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

So are you saying we don't have to have a referendum to change an Bunreacht?

The voting population are given predetermined choices in the polling-booth (as determined by the governing numpties) -- are you saying they can arbitrarily rearrange the options, or add new ones? Get real.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

i'm not that worried about the name of the 26. what boils me most is "ulster" when they mean the 6 counties

Give us back West Cavan and South West Fermanagh   

We want Clare too.

[Rossfan]

So are you saying we don't have to have a referendum to change an Bunreacht?

The voting population are given predetermined choices in the polling-booth (as determined by the governing numpties) -- are you saying they can arbitrarily rearrange the options, or add new ones? Get real.

I never said or suggested anything of the sort so please...
As you well know the voters can reject any proposal to amend an Bunreacht.
We chose to accept the changes in 1998.
The people of Ireland ( all of it  ) voted to accept the Good Friday Agreement.

The politicians may be all numpties BUT they are the people putting themselves up for election and getting chosen by the voters.

[muppet]

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/martin-claims-sinn-féin-has-sullied-republicanism-1.1367551?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[Maguire01]

Patronising? Your post clearly implied you didn't know the difference between a nation and a state - I was posting about the state and you replied with reference to the nation.

I posted in reply to Fear ón Srath Bán, who made a specific and useful point. I didn't say anything, one way or the other, that was related to something you might have said a dozen posts earlier.

But he made an incorrect point. And you said he was 'spot on'. The conversation was about the state, not the nation. The state was never defined as 32 counties - either before or after amendments to Articles 2 and 3 - the nation was.

Prior to 1921 wasn't Ireland a 32 county state?
Albeit under English jurisdiction.

No. The state was the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. The 32 counties didn't have sovereignty. In the same way as Scotland isn't a state now.

That's not my point - what you are describing as a 'state'.
they were a 32 county entity.
Home rule and various other reunification efforts were always about the 32 county entity.
At some points ( Parnell) this was close to happening.

Whether its a fully established self determining 32 county state/entity or not ( currently not) the world sees it as such - Ireland!

Bought black sabbath tickets from the english branch of ticketmaster and they were advertising the gig
Black sabbath , Belfast, Ireland.
That's how the world sees it, whether politically correct ( or in place) or not!

I wasn't arguing popular perception. I was talking about the constitutional and political reality.

And for every band listing 'Belfast, Ireland', I can show you another listing 'Belfast, UK'.

Most people in the world see it as a single identity-Ireland!

I'd not be surprised to see 'Belfast-uk' as isn't this the current  assignation!
But my example is just to show what most of the world thinks!

Again, you're on a different argument that i'm not disagreeing on! The argument here was the name of the state, not the popular perception.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

So are you saying we don't have to have a referendum to change an Bunreacht?

The voting population are given predetermined choices in the polling-booth (as determined by the governing numpties) -- are you saying they can arbitrarily rearrange the options, or add new ones? Get real.

I never said or suggested anything of the sort so please...
As you well know the voters can reject any proposal to amend an Bunreacht.
We chose to accept the changes in 1998.
The people of Ireland ( all of it  ) voted to accept the Good Friday Agreement.

The politicians may be all numpties BUT they are the people putting themselves up for election and getting chosen by the voters.

Let me repeat, the voters are given predetermined choices, as drawn up by the incompetents (patently), and if the choices are deficient (like the mangling of the reframing of the Bunreacht) there's nothing much the plain voter can do about it at that stage.

You naively believe it seems, that the choices in the GFA implied that all components therein were of good and sound thinking, when obviously pig ears were in great supply in the framing of such. Now stop digging.

[Maguire01]

The use of northern Ireland as a middle ground has incorrectly given rise to it being an actual entity!

What are you talking about?! An entity is something that exists. Northern Ireland does exist. And it was recognised in the GFA, the subsequent Northern Ireland Act, the Northern Ireland Assembly... it's not a figment of someone's imagination.

I think the other issue here is simply the use of the word 'state' .
I believe everyone knows the present jurisdiction it falls under, but the word state does not solely apply to this definition. That's why I've chosen to use the word 'entity' but the same meaning can be applied to he use of the word 'state'.

Please share this alternative definition of state. I understood it to be a fairly objective word.

[Maguire01]

Pre-1999, the Irish Constitution encompassed all 32 counties as 'Ireland' ('national territory').

Post-1999, the 6 counties magically (tragically) disappear (this piece of moronic stupidity from the same geniuses that have delivered the 26 counties into German dominated servitude).

Go figure...

Actually, given that the amendments were part of the GFA - the revised articles appear in the Agreement itself - you can't lay the blame at the door of the southern government. All of the parties to those negotiations, including Sinn Féin, are responsible for those amendments to the constitution.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

Pre-1999, the Irish Constitution encompassed all 32 counties as 'Ireland' ('national territory').

Post-1999, the 6 counties magically (tragically) disappear (this piece of moronic stupidity from the same geniuses that have delivered the 26 counties into German dominated servitude).

Go figure...

Actually, given that the amendments were part of the GFA - the revised articles appear in the Agreement itself - you can't lay the blame at the door of the southern government. All of the parties to those negotiations, including Sinn Féin, are responsible for those amendments to the constitution.

Oh yes I can: nothing passed the Oireachtas without having gone through the majority party (or parties) therein (since they, and they only, could pass such legislation, regardless of whom might have been involved in the drafting of such). Next piece of revisionism?

[muppet]

FOSB I love the way you can (almost) rationalise away anything remotely inconvenient without a fermion of self-doubt. 

I plan to steal your options deficient line as an argument against any vote in the future.

e.g. "drawn up by the incompetents (patently), and if the choices are deficient (like the mangling of the reframing of the Bunreacht)"

[Maguire01]

Pre-1999, the Irish Constitution encompassed all 32 counties as 'Ireland' ('national territory').

Post-1999, the 6 counties magically (tragically) disappear (this piece of moronic stupidity from the same geniuses that have delivered the 26 counties into German dominated servitude).

Go figure...

Actually, given that the amendments were part of the GFA - the revised articles appear in the Agreement itself - you can't lay the blame at the door of the southern government. All of the parties to those negotiations, including Sinn Féin, are responsible for those amendments to the constitution.

Oh yes I can: nothing passed the Oireachtas without having gone through the majority party therein (since they, and they only, could pass such legislation, regardless of whom might have been involved in the drafting of such). Next piece of revisionism?

Revisionism? The proposed amendments were in the Good Friday Agreement. This is what was negotiated by all those parties to the talks. All those parties - and SF was a significant player in the talks - supported and urged the public to vote for the revised articles.

My point is not what the southern government did, but the fact that those changes wouldn't have been in the agreement if all parties to the talks hadn't agreed to them.

It follows therefore, that if these amendments constitute incompetence, then all parties who reached agreement and all parties who campaigned for a 'Yes' vote are liable.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

Revisionism? The proposed amendments were in the Good Friday Agreement. This is what was negotiated by all those parties to the talks. All those parties - and SF was a significant player in the talks - supported and urged the public to vote for the revised articles.

My point is not what the southern government did, but the fact that those changes wouldn't have been in the agreement if all parties to the talks hadn't agreed to them.

It follows therefore, that if these amendments constitute incompetence, then all parties who reached agreement and all parties who campaigned for a 'Yes' vote are liable.

Given the relative enormity of what the GFA encompassed (legislatively, and culturally), such minutiae as might have been missed or mangled with the Bunreacht may have slipped from the general public consciousness (and understandably so).

They should not, however, have slipped from the consciousness, and indeed responsibility, of the Oireachtas, they being the ultimate guarantors and custodians of the integrity of that same Constitution. They failed, and as the powers that were that is unforgivably remiss.