Would you rather live in Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland in the 70s?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The Republic was at the time of course a very peaceful, stable and democratic state. However it was also the most backward place in the western world, condoms and birth control were illegal (I looked it up, they weren't legalized until 1979), divorce was illegal, there were laws capping women's salaries, institutionalized discrimination against non-Catholics (one awful law I believe was on the books was that if either parent in a couple was Catholic, they had to raise the kids Catholic, and they did not recognize conversions, so basically if both parents were converts from Catholicism they were still legally required to raise their kids Catholic) and the Catholic church locked up girls in slave labor laundries.

Northern Ireland on the other hand was certainly much less peaceful and stable and also has a pretty big problem with its own religious nuts, but divorce and contraception were legal, men and women were legally equal, and there were none of those Magdalene slave labor laundries.

I would go with Northern Ireland.

[Јas]

there were laws capping women's salaries, institutionalized discrimination against non-Catholics (one awful law I believe was on the books was that if either parent in a couple was Catholic, they had to raise the kids Catholic, and they did not recognize conversions, so basically if both parents were converts from Catholicism they were still legally required to raise their kids Catholic)

Please cite the Acts/give your sources for these claims.

condoms and birth control were illegal (I looked it up, they weren't legalized until 1979)

The Supreme Court case of McGee v Attorney General [1973] IR 284, ruled that the ban on contraception was unconstitutional.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It's something I read on DU.

[patrick1]

It's something I read on DU.

How do you cite that according to the Chicago Manual of Style?

[Јas]

It's something I read on DU.

While at this moment in this, I can't 100% categorically deny the part I quoted above, I would be greatly surprised if this is true. I've never heard of such laws or practices.

With regard to the salary issue, it would seem to me that any such law would easily be struck down as unconstitutional (breaching the substantive equality guarantee of Article 40) especially by the activist court of the 60s/70s.

As to the matter regarding children. That which you describe is standard Catholic practice eminating from a papal encyclical from sometime between 1870-1910 (I'll try and look it up later). I'm reasonably certain that this to was not actually the law of the state. Requiring anyone to be part of a particular religion would be a gross violation of the constitution also (Article 44.2).

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I can't remember where I originally read the thing about women's salaries, but I did a search and found this (worth noting that  this is a pro-IRA site) http://irelandsown.net/armaghwomen.html

The Catholic establishment, along with the conservative government in the South, further perpetrated this image to confine women to the spheres of stereotypical domestic roles by actions such as banning divorce, prohibiting contraception, and restricting salaries for married women.

It appears it was only for married women, whether that affects the constitutional status I don't know.

[Јas]

I can't remember where I originally read the thing about women's salaries, but I did a search and found this (worth noting that  this is a pro-IRA site) http://irelandsown.net/armaghwomen.html

The Catholic establishment, along with the conservative government in the South, further perpetrated this image to confine women to the spheres of stereotypical domestic roles by actions such as banning divorce, prohibiting contraception, and restricting salaries for married women.

It appears it was only for married women, whether that affects the constitutional status I don't know.

It's quite unlikely that the married status would affect the constitutional issue.
I would also note that on joining the EEC in 1973, the EC Treaty became part of Irish law. This (at the then Article 119) required member states to actively seek pay equality. This has been backed up by a number of directives (e.g. Council Directive 75/117/EEC) since which are all enforceable by the Irish courts.

BTW, I don't understand what point you're making with regard to the pro-IRA stance of the website.

[Platypus]

For me neither option would really be acceptable; I'd go with Norther Ireland though b/c it would be easier to move to England.

[Јas]

For me neither option would really be acceptable; I'd go with Norther Ireland though b/c it would be easier to move to England.

FTR, there is actually no difficulty is travelling between here (the Republic) and England. They have formed what is in effect a free travel area since the state was formed.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

BTW, I don't understand what point you're making with regard to the pro-IRA stance of the website.

Basically that such a claim can't be dismissed as unionist propaganda.

[Platypus]

For me neither option would really be acceptable; I'd go with Norther Ireland though b/c it would be easier to move to England.

FTR, there is actually no difficulty is travelling between here (the Republic) and England. They have formed what is in effect a free travel area since the state was formed.

I meant as an emigrant; but is it as easy to move there permanently?

Now of course i'd pick Ireland, but back then I'd be leaing for England in either case.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

and Northern Ireland is winning. Not shocking though as the religious repression in Ireland then was about as bad as in your typical Muslim country today.l

[??????????]

RoI without a doubt.

[Јas]

BTW, I don't understand what point you're making with regard to the pro-IRA stance of the website.

Basically that such a claim can't be dismissed as unionist propaganda.

That doesn't mean it could not be dismissed as IRA propoganda, a body which didn't even recognise the validity of the Southern state.

For me neither option would really be acceptable; I'd go with Norther Ireland though b/c it would be easier to move to England.

FTR, there is actually no difficulty is travelling between here (the Republic) and England. They have formed what is in effect a free travel area since the state was formed.

I meant as an emigrant; but is it as easy to move there permanently?

Yes, then and now. Indeed Irish citizens living in Britain also have a right to vote and stand in elections there (which I believe is reciprocated here).

Up until 1949, anyone born in Ireland was entitled to British citizenship. In 1949, when Ireland formally declared itself a republic and left the Commonwealth, Westminster passed the Ireland Act which allowed for basically the continuation of the previous relationship between the two states.

Of course, a number of rights of freedom of movement for workers came when both joined the EEC in 1973, but they didn't supercede (and indeed are less extensive in nature) previous and ongoing rights.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The Republic, obviously. I don't actually want to get blown up.