Talk:Save Ulster from Sodomy

Untitled

The whole article does not have a citation. It should be merged back to Ian Paisley. Does anyone have any objections? Wallie 15:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I've slightly expanded the relevant section in the Ian Paisley article, to incorporate what appeared to me to be significant background details, and would now support a merge. (I assume that a redirect would be retained.) Vilĉjo 00:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

There have been no objections (and I have included in the Ian Paisley article the remaining material from this article). I am therefore making this a redirect. Vilĉjo 00:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

reverted. This is about a campaign, not a politician. The article needs to be expanded, as it no doubt will be. But merging an article on a specific campaign into an article about a politician is about a ludicrous as merging 9/11 into George W. Bush. FearÉIREANN\^{(caint) 00:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)}

AFAIK, the campaign is wholly identified with the individual, (so the 9/11 analogy is not at all helpful). Perhaps my information in this regard is incomplete, but it would be useful to know what more can be said on this subject than what is already in, or could reasonably be incorporated in, the IP article (unless wholesale duplication of material between closely related articles is regarded as a good thing in itself.) Vilĉjo 00:55, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Among issues that can be included, but can't be included in the Paisley page, are

• the law on homosexuality in NI before the campaign
• its applicability
• the attitude of the main political parties and churches
• the launch of the campaign
• the extent to which it achieved cross party or cross community support
• its funding
• media reaction
• its political focus
• the reaction of the British government
• the reaction of gay groups
• the details of the court decisions
• the methodology of implemention
• the longterm impact or otherwise of the campaign.

Short articles with a degree of duplication are created all the time to allow a longer more in-depth piece to evolve over time. We don't dump everything into the one article. FearÉIREANN\^{(caint) 01:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)}

OK, I do take your point. May I just (in a totally non-accusatory way!) suggest that, since this article was clearly on your watchlist, it would have saved some of us wasting our time if you had raised your objections to a merge when it was first raised by Wallie 19 days ago? Vilĉjo 01:16, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Roman Catholicism

The campaign...focused on Paisley's belief in his role to save the "Ulster people" from those influences which he believed undermined their Christian beliefs and values, namely liberalism, secularism and Roman Catholicism.
Given that Catholic opposition to "sodomy" was well known, it cannot be said that the campaign focused on Catholic influences, whatever Paisley's attitude to the Catholic Church otherwise. Here is a report on the 1982 state papers which says that a DUP submission "refers to 'widespread' opposition to legalisation outside the party, including from other parties, the Protestant churches, the Catholic church and 'almost all' councils." I am removing "Roman Catholicism" accordingly. Scolaire (talk) 12:54, 5 August 2015 (UTC)