Sir, - David Trimble appears to need both a lesson in recentRepublic of Ireland history and, rather more urgently, a lesson inmanners.
As the First Minister of the North of Ireland, he should knowsomething of contemporary Ireland. Clearly he does not. I come from aChurch of Ireland background and I have watched this State emerge inthe past 30 years from a "sectarian, monocultural, mono-ethnic" - and,might I add, an unbelievably dull society - to what it is now. It isnow clearly none of those things.
As someone from the Protestant tradition, I have gone from feelinglike an outsider in my own country to now being very much part of whatis clearly a new society. No longer is it required to "keep your headdown" and avoid expressing your opinions at all costs. Quite thereverse.
Mr. Trimble may not have noticed that home rule ceased to be Romerule quite some time ago and that we now have legislation allowingcontraception, divorce and recognition of common-law marriage. Consideralso that most of the Roman Catholic majority now feel able to ignoretheir bishops' advice on how to vote in referendums and make up theirown minds.
Mr Trimble, like so many of his tradition, has chosen to take ablinkered and misinformed view of the Republic of Ireland as it existstoday.
Being the leader of the Ulster Unionist party cannot be easy. I havewitnessed Mr Trimble playing to the gallery many times just to hold onto that leadership. But making stupid, misinformed, ignorant commentsabout a neighbouring sovereign state is simply not statesmanlike - andcertainly not what one would expect of a First Minister. - Yours, etc.,
Lower Ormond Quay,
Dublin 1
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - Look at Cardinal Connell's frequent spats with the Church ofIreland, at Irish attitudes to homosexuality, at the crowd in a pubevery time England play football. Even look at the more hystericalreactions to Mr Trimble's speech. All can be described as containingpathetic sectarian opinions.
The central point of that part of the speech was that the UnitedKingdom would better safeguard a mix of unionist and nationalistculture, something which is very difficult to argue with. Can wehonestly say that we are ready to accept 900,000 people of a completelydifferent - and, in many cases, opposed - culture to our own onanything other than our terms only?
As well as that, we don't seem prepared to do the work necessary toaccommodate Unionists properly. Until that happens they would indeed bebetter off being part of the United Kingdom.- Yours, etc.,
PAUL SHERIDAN,
Bachelors Walk,
Dublin 1.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - As an Englishman who has lived in the Republic for a verylong time, I resent David Trimble's implication, that being British, heis also, somehow, English. - Yours, etc.,
JEREMY CRAWFORD,
Lismore Park,
Waterford.