Opinion

Unionists savouring assembly’s contradictory electoral irony

DUP leader Arlene Foster (centre) stands with with party colleagues during her party's election billboard launch outside Titanic Belfast
DUP leader Arlene Foster (centre) stands with with party colleagues during her party's election billboard launch outside Titanic Belfast DUP leader Arlene Foster (centre) stands with with party colleagues during her party's election billboard launch outside Titanic Belfast

Despite the usual assumptions to the contrary there is a definite and obvious change in voting patterns discernible among certain elements of the electorate. The usual assumption that change is impossible was cynically expressed by a visiting journalist years ago who said of us here in NI that we would literally and loyally vote at the hustings, if necessity demanded, for either an orange parrot or a green one – no matter how idiotically it repeated what its historical community taught it to say and demanded it mimicked.  

Though that may even yet be generally true of us, some political analysts have more recently observed that many potential voters, questioning their historical party/loyalties, are now beginning to scrutinise more closely the policies of both party candidates and independents standing for election – examining especially the moral and ethical principles which underpin the candidates understanding of, what have become three controversial areas in human life, namely birth, marriage and death; or (to use more recognisably political terminology) abortion, same -sex marriage and euthanasia. 

Significant evidence in support of these observations emerged just a few days ago when Catholic bishops, in a pastoral letter, directed the Catholic electorate to avoid conscientiously candidates who support pro-choice abortion; or who ignore the Pope’s declaration “that there are no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family”; or candidates who do not acknowledge the “inviolability” of a human being’s existence as a fundamental moral principle, “whatever their state or stage of life”.

After much discussion with others who have studied the various electoral manifestos I have had it pointed out to me that the two parties who actually reflect the directions of the bishops and the teachings of the Catholic Church on these fundamental matters are the DUP and the TUV.

If we can briefly distance ourselves from reflecting on the seriousness of all these matters we might be momentarily amused enough to consider that those parties are more Catholic than others we might think of and who might resent just such a conclusion. 

But at the very least who would begrudge those unionists parties a wry smile or some degree of amusement as they witness many traditionalist, nationalist voters enter the polling booths in schizoid agonies. In all psephological fairness, given these unionist parties’ policies on birth, marriage and death in contrast to the policies of other parties, they must be consciously savouring this contradictory and delectably delicious irony.

DANIEL HOLMES


Limavady, Co Derry

Obama should keep nose out of British affairs

I  never thought that I would see the day when a British prime minister  would lower his international status  by grovelling for foreign support on a domestic issue that applies to nobody but the British people.

For Mr Obama to involve himself in the referendum debate in supporting Britain to remain in the EU not only displays gross, naive, ignorance but also disrespect to the millions of British people who wish to leave the EU.

Yes, America did share the battle with Britain to defeat Nazism but so did many other countries (too numerous to mention) that does not qualify Mr Obama to poke his nose in where it is not wanted, nor for that matter necessary.

By lending your support to David Cameron & Co he is asking the British people to accept total governance, by a collection of foreign nations that involves accepting an open border that has already flooded Britain with humanity that varies from the decent to the most vile species imaginable.

Hence it goes with out saying it is the British people who are paying the price, of such imbecilic governance.

Employment, law and order, schools, the  National Health Service – which is the envy of the world, including America – all are suffering, from such European Union governance.

Britain has reached the crisis stage. The people can take no more.

So, in conclusion, I say to Mr Obama: “Can you imagine for one moment, a British prime minster going to your country and ordering America to open up its borders to an unlimited, uninvited number of immigrants which the citizens of America must accept?”

I rest my case.

HARRY STEPHENSON


Kircubbin, Co Down

Outlandish predictions

Patrick Murphy’s suggestion (April 16) – life outside the EU but within the EEA – fails to mention that this option would almost certainly result in us implementing EU rules but having no say in how they’re written. Norway, which is outside the EU, is consistently one of the most faithful implementers of EU legislation but has no formal input into their content. It is also worth pointing-out that it is not ‘pro-EU supporters’ as he says who envisage a return to border controls at Newry, it was Lord Lawson, chairman of the Vote Leave campaign, who said they would return.

Sadly his article concludes by saying that a full EU state, with its own army is soon to follow, with a repeat of the First World War a possible next step. Not a shred of evidence for these outlandish doomsday predictions was offered by Mr Murphy, and while no-one can say that the EU alone has prevented further world wars in Europe, the soon-to-be commemorated centenary of the battle of the Somme and the recent 75th anniversary of the Belfast blitz serve as poignant reminders of what happened when European nations tried to solve their differences in an era before the EU. 

Voters like Mr Murphy might like to recall these awful events, rather than outlandish predictions, and do as John Hewitt suggests and “bear in mind these dead” when it comes to voting day on June 23.

PAUL HAGAN


Portadown, Co Armagh

Airbrushed from history

The expression give credit where credit’s due was repeated often by my very fair-minded mother when we were young. I’ve found myself thinking about it often as I’ve listened to reports about the events of Easter week 1916. As a great admirer of Francis Sheehy Skeffington, I find it strange that another man of principle seems to have been airbrushed out of  history in many accounts of the aftermath of the murder.  

Major Sir Francis Fletcher Vane lost his career and his good reputation through his determination to see that a fellow officer at Portabello Barracks be held accountable for the murders there. He persisted despite opposition from both Dublin and London till a public inquiry was held.

I’m sure that both Francis and Hanna Sheehy Skeffington would have wished that his part in their story be remembered. We sing of the Forty Shades of Green but our history might be more accurately recounted in 40 shades of grey. 

MAIREAD McKEOWN


Dunmurry, Co Antrim