The Battle for Fermanagh and South Tyrone

[ardmhachaabu]

No Zap, not what I meant and definitely not what the theme of the thread is about. 

Unionists being sectarian is the same as shinners being sectarian.  That's what you and some others on here seem to miss completely. 

Now, orange/green = unionist/nationalist - yes?  Who votes unionist and who votes nationalist parties?  It's a simple question zap and one I would prefer that you give a simple answer to.  That's where the sectarianism lies in terms of politics here.  People don't vote for bread and butter issues, they vote for the flag which is bullshit.  Any party who wishes to indulge in/indulges in electoral pacts for the sake of keeping one constituency or other green or orange is engaging in sectarian politics

[Nally Stand]

So we should all take the SDLP approach and neglect the issue of national self determination for fear of being labelled sectarian? Orange and green politics is the reality here and no 'head in the clouds' attitude can change that. It is not sectarian politics, it is the reality of the political situation people live under here. Partition still exists. Having a political opinion that professes an opposition to partition does not make someone sectarian. Having a political opinion that supports partition does not make someone sectarian.

[Zapatista]

No Zap, not what I meant and definitely not what the theme of the thread is about. 

Unionists being sectarian is the same as shinners being sectarian.  That's what you and some others on here seem to miss completely. 

Now, orange/green = unionist/nationalist - yes?  Who votes unionist and who votes nationalist parties?  It's a simple question zap and one I would prefer that you give a simple answer to.  That's where the sectarianism lies in terms of politics here.  People don't vote for bread and butter issues, they vote for the flag which is bullshit.  Any party who wishes to indulge in/indulges in electoral pacts for the sake of keeping one constituency or other green or orange is engaging in sectarian politics

Nationalist vote Green and Unionist Vote Orange. Green and orange are only tags though they are not political stances. G&O are the 'dumbling down' of the political divide.

People do vote for a flag which is Nationalism. If you vote for an Irish Flag it's Irish Nationalism and for the UJ it's British Nationalism. Nationalism is not sectarian it's just Nationalism. And yes it is stupid.

Most people I know would vote SF because they are Republican. I'd say that Gerry Adams doesn't run around west Belfast saying 'vote for me I'm a catholic'. I'd say the voters of west Belfast don't think 'I'm going to vote for Gerry Adams because he is a catholic'. They would vote for him as a Nationalist or as a Republican.

However in FST, the Unionist strategy has been organised by  the OO. They did this in order to get a Protestant elected. The OO are sectarian. This makes it a sectarian candidate. SF did not approach the SDLP asking them to enter a pact to get their candidates elected as they are Catholics opposed to Protestantism. They did it because they are opposed to the sectarian strategy of the OO and opposed to Unionism. This is something very different than what you are trying to say.

Nationalism, Republicanism and Unionism are not sectarian. The OO are and the OO order strategy is. Why do you ignore this? Why do you claim SF are standing on an anti protestant ticket when it is quite clear that it isn't the case?

[ardmhachaabu]

Yes they are zap.

Politics in the north is sectarian politics whether you or other shinner sypathisers want to admit it or not, at least the SDLP are trying to rise above it, the provos/shinners have always taken advantage of it and always will.  You see, I am proud of men like Tone, Adams et al aren't fit to lace the man's shoes - Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter is the very last thing the shinners could ever claim to represent.  Anyone trying to argue that sectarian politics in the north is something else really needs to take some time out and have a fresh look at the situation without bias, oh and also look up the word in the dictionary, it might help you to understand what it's all about

That's my last word to you or anyone else.  Have all the jibes youse like knowing I won't reply, sure it makes men of some of you

[Zapatista]

Yes they are zap.

Politics in the north is sectarian politics whether you or other shinner sypathisers want to admit it or not, at least the SDLP are trying to rise above it, the provos/shinners have always taken advantage of it and always will.  You see, I am proud of men like Tone, Adams et al aren't fit to lace the man's shoes - Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter is the very last thing the shinners could ever claim to represent.  Anyone trying to argue that sectarian politics in the north is something else really needs to take some time out and have a fresh look at the situation without bias, oh and also look up the word in the dictionary, it might help you to understand what it's all about

That's my last word to you or anyone else.  Have all the jibes youse like knowing I won't reply, sure it makes men of some of you

It's the inability of the narrow minded that keep sectarianism in Irish politics. Your only argument is  "Yes they are", that's weak. It's a vague responce to avoid detail. You make no attempt to adress my points other than to say I'm wrong and that Adams isn't like Wolfetone.

You and I are different as I never give wolfetone a second thought. The guy has been dead for 200 years. I'm not proud of anybody who has been dead 200 years. I'm not proud of the boys of 1916 or the the boys who fought in the war of independance or the Hungerstrikers. I admire many of them though. If I was proud of them I'd have to be equally ashamed of the Irish men and women who have done their damndest to try to stop them.

I am argguing that there is sectarian politics in the North as my previous post clearly says. In this case it comes from the OO. I'm also saying that Nationalism, Republicanism and Unionism are not sectarian. You say i'm wrong but that's all you say.

[Ulick]

Hard luck Zap, but you got to admit this was a clinker:

I give up, it's hard to debate with people who don't understand the concepts which you are debating

[Nally Stand]

That's my last word to you or anyone else.  Have all the jibes youse like knowing I won't reply, sure it makes men of some of you

Makes a real man of you, not replying though does it?

[Zapatista]

Hard luck Zap, but you got to admit this was a clinker:

I give up, it's hard to debate with people who don't understand the concepts which you are debating

I didn't quite get that. Some sort of irony? Irony is always lost on me.

[Myles Na G.]

So we should all take the SDLP approach and neglect the issue of national self determination for fear of being labelled sectarian? Orange and green politics is the reality here and no 'head in the clouds' attitude can change that. It is not sectarian politics, it is the reality of the political situation people live under here. Partition still exists. Having a political opinion that professes an opposition to partition does not make someone sectarian. Having a political opinion that supports partition does not make someone sectarian.

The issue of national determination has been settled and voted on in referenda north and south of the border. Irishmen and women have exercised their right to self determination by deciding that, until there is a majority in favour of reunification on both sides of the border, the island will continue in its current two state form. All the main political parties on the island supported this, as did some 75% of those who voted. Given that there is unlikely to be a seismic change in unionist opinion in the immediate future, the issue has been sorted for at least a generation, possibly two. The problem for Sinn Fein, is that they're not sure how to explain this to their electorate. They have therefore to keep on making ludicrous claims, such as the one about there being a united Ireland by 2016. It is also the reason why electoral pacts around the constitutional issue are bogus.

[Rossfan]

claims, such as the one about there being a united Ireland by 1916. .

There was a United Ireland in 1916 

[Myles Na G.]

claims, such as the one about there being a united Ireland by 1916. .

There was a United Ireland in 1916 

yeah, alright. I'll give you that one.
Fixed it. 

[armagho9]

ardmhachaabu, I even copied my post a second time for you because you admitted you didn't read it properly this morning. You still haven't replied to it. 

You mean this one?

I don't know about all this sectarian headcounting business. Surely the difference between the two sides is a constitutional matter not an ecumenical one as Fr Dougal might say? If you buy into the sectarian thing then you are also buying into the British led propaganda so prevalent in the 70s, 80s and 90s that we had a religious conflict here i.e. it was not about the constitutional position of the north and our right to complete self-determination. If the sectarian headcounting business is true where does that leave good Protestant nationalists like CS Parnell and good Protestant republicans like T Wolfe Tone?

I'm disappointed by Maskey's withdrawl as it leaves me no one to vote for as I promised myself after the last election that I wouldn't give Anna Lo another vote, however I find it hard to ague against a position which aims to maximise support for the Irish nationalist and republican position on the national question.

That approach is sectarian and anyone who supports that stance for reasons of sectarian headcounting is sectarian

It's not sectarian, it is common sense to try and get someone into a seat (that SF are unlikely to win themselves) that share the same main objective.(ie. A united Ireland).  Nationalists believe in a United Ireland and they should be trying to strengthen their position, if that means using tactical voting or stepping aside then thats what they should do.  If believing in a United Ireland and trying to strengthen nationalism/ republicanism makes someone sectarian, then i'm guilty.  (personally dont regard it as being sectarian)

Was it common sense or sectarian when unionists did it ?

common sense on their behalf, surely it makes more sense to get someone into a seat that is closer in opinion than someone who is off the total opposite opinion.  (that is if your own party are unlikely to win it).  There are pacts between parties all the time in every government around the world.

I give up, it's hard to debate with people who don't understand the concepts which you are debating

You have just a very simplistic way of looking at things (they're protestant, we're catholics we dont get along so that makes it sectarian).  To be Sectarian means to be show predjudice against someone based on religion.  I am a republican, but i have many protestant friends.  I disagree with their politics not their religion which is why it is not sectarian.

[Banana Man]

Is Billy Lenoard the SF MLA for East Derry not a Protestant and former Orange man - he must have slipped through the SF anti-Protestant net   

FFS catch a grip it's not a religious issue, republican mans anti-monarchy not anti-protestant, I'd say half of the SF reps haven't seen the inside of a chapel since their confirmation

[Baile an tuaigh]

Is Billy Lenoard the SF MLA for East Derry not a Protestant and former Orange man - he must have slipped through the SF anti-Protestant net   

FFS catch a grip it's not a religious issue, republican mans anti-monarchy not anti-protestant, I'd say half of the SF reps haven't seen the inside of a chapel since their confirmation

Sinn Fein were also trying to promote the integration of school children as well.

[Ulick]

Has the SDLP made a public comment about the Church abuse scandals?