• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

John Bruton, former Taoiseach, says we should ignore the Supreme Court


ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
50,459
Speaking on RTE radio today (the Marian Finucane programme, but presented by Aine Lawlor), former Taoiseach John Bruton said that the 1992 Supreme Court was wrong in its interpretation of the constitution, when it ruled on the 'X' case.

Bruton, who is in receipt of a pension from the State, said the government should legislate but that grounds of suicide should be excluded.

When asked by Lawlor if there should be a referendum, he said there was no need as the Supreme Court had just been wrong.

Can anybody think of any other political parties or movements which advocated ignoring the verdicts of our courts? I can.

It seems the Christian Democrats may have forgotten the latter part of their name.

That this is a former Taoiseach, is all the more troubling. Edit: And as pointed out by ruserious , Mr Bruton also qualifies to sit on the Council of State.

Perhaps a podcast will be available later.
 
Last edited:

Mountaintop

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2011
Messages
1,263
I'd be far more inclined to just ignore John Bruton.

The Supreme Court was wrong John?....ah, thanks for that.
 

Ramon Mercadar

Well-known member
Joined
May 31, 2006
Messages
15,207
I'd be far more inclined to just ignore John Bruton.

The Supreme Court was wrong John?....ah, thanks for that.
John is not a politician anymore, hes a lobbyist.
 

ruserious

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
29,599
Is this the same John Bruton that is on the Council of State?
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
50,459
I'd be far more inclined to just ignore John Bruton.


The Supreme Court was wrong John?....ah, thanks for that.
I usually ignore him, but given that this unelected citizen still has great influence in FG, I fear he will not be ignored where it matters.
 

Levellers

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
14,116
Who can forget Bruton falling to his knees when he met Charles Windsor?

 

Analyzer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
46,201
I am waiting for Donkeylaffs to do a Christian deed with all those mega pensions that he is "earning"....
 

borntorum

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
12,805
FG - the slightly constitutional party?
 

mr. jings

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
8,095
I am waiting for Donkeylaffs to do a Christian deed with all those mega pensions that he is "earning"....
I may be wrong, but I believe all his wonga is perfectly in line with accepted Vatican practice.
 

Analyzer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
46,201
Who can forget Bruton falling to his knees when he met Charles Windsor?

The gentleman on his knees in that picture is far more dignified that the laughing fool in the Donkeylaffs episode in Dublin Castle at the Charles Windsor banquet.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
224,093
Speaking on RTE radio today (the Marian Finucane programme, but presented by Aine Lawlor), former Taoiseach John Bruton said that the 1992 Supreme Court was wrong in its interpretation of the constitution, when it ruled on the 'X' case.

Bruton, who is in receipt of a pension from the State, said the government should legislate but that grounds of suicide should be excluded.

When asked by Lawlor if there should be a referendum, he said there was no need as the Supreme Court had just been wrong.

Can anybody think of any other political parties or movements which advocated ignoring the verdicts of our courts? I can.

It seems the Christian Democrats may have forgotten the latter part of their name.

That this is a former Taoiseach, is all the more troubling.

Perhaps a podcast will be available later.
He did make a good point though.

He said as it can never be predicted who might or might not commit suicide with any degree of accuracy, the threat of suicide can only be seen as a possibility whereas the act of abortion will with 100% certainty end the life of the unborn and given our constitution gives equal regard to the life of the unborn, it is almost impossible to see how a possibility on the one hand can overrule a certainty on the other, where protection against that certainty is guaranteed by our constitution.
 

Analyzer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
46,201
The strange irony of all of this is that Donkeylaffs is a barrister.

He is actually trained in this area.

He has SFA training in banking or economics, and is the Tom Parlon of the IFSC. Obviously nothing to do with merit. So we can readily discount his pronouncements on financial matters.

But the legal area is supposed to be his area of expertise.
 

Analyzer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
46,201
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
50,459
He did make a good point though.


He said as it can never be predicted who might or might not commit suicide with any degree of accuracy, the threat of suicide can only be seen as a possibility whereas the act of abortion will with 100% certainty end the life of the unborn and given our constitution gives equal regard to the life of the unborn, it is almost impossible to see how a possibility on the one hand can overrule a certainty on the other, where protection against that certainty is guaranteed by our constitution.
If he feels those points are worth making, then he is fully entitled to argue for another referendum.

Do you feel it is right to advocate ignoring the highest court in our land?
 

ManUnited

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
5,221
Speaking on RTE radio today (the Marian Finucane programme, but presented by Aine Lawlor), former Taoiseach John Bruton said that the 1992 Supreme Court was wrong in its interpretation of the constitution, when it ruled on the 'X' case.

Bruton, who is in receipt of a pension from the State, said the government should legislate but that grounds of suicide should be excluded.

When asked by Lawlor if there should be a referendum, he said there was no need as the Supreme Court had just been wrong.

Can anybody think of any other political parties or movements which advocated ignoring the verdicts of our courts? I can.

It seems the Christian Democrats may have forgotten the latter part of their name.

That this is a former Taoiseach, is all the more troubling.

Perhaps a podcast will be available later.
You are clutching at straws here. 'Checks and balances', 'separation of powers'..legislatures passing statutes to undo court decisions they don't like is how it is supposed to work, it is democracy in action.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
224,093
If he feels those points are worth making, then he is fully entitled to argue for another referendum.

Do you feel it is right to advocate ignoring the highest court in our land?
In this particular case, I would think he could have a point in that the case was not defended, only one side of the case was heard and that would be highly unusual.

Personally I'd prefer a new referendum.
 
Top