<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for A Clatter of the Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://aclatterofthelaw.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com</link>
	<description>Law &#124; Levities &#124; Limerick</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:15:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About by Terry Gorry</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/about/#comment-2007</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Terry Gorry]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aclatterofthelaw.com/?page_id=386#comment-2007</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting site-like the post about the Supreme Court decision and legal aid. I think I will be relying on it in the not too distant future..]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting site-like the post about the Supreme Court decision and legal aid. I think I will be relying on it in the not too distant future..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Taoiseach&#8217;s residence by Zaha Hadid by thepilatesbiz.com</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/2010/01/02/taoiseachs-residence-by-zaha-hadid/#comment-1998</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[thepilatesbiz.com]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 03:10:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clatterofthelaw.wordpress.com/?p=182#comment-1998</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[as far as being irritating to the stomach, heavy proteins or foods are hard on the stomach before a race unless eaten far enough in advance to be absorbed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>as far as being irritating to the stomach, heavy proteins or foods are hard on the stomach before a race unless eaten far enough in advance to be absorbed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Biometric national ID cards for Ireland on the way? by thepilatesbiz.com</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/2009/10/30/84/#comment-1995</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[thepilatesbiz.com]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:28:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clatterofthelaw.wordpress.com/?p=84#comment-1995</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[*Matt* you are a crazy good trainer, and you can tell you love what you dokeep up the great work.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*Matt* you are a crazy good trainer, and you can tell you love what you dokeep up the great work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Stop SOPA Ireland by sebthered</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/2012/01/25/stop-sopa-ireland/#comment-1938</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[sebthered]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 09:05:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clatterofthelaw.wordpress.com/?p=1181#comment-1938</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reblogged this on &lt;a href=&quot;http://onlycametoseeeboue.wordpress.com/2012/01/28/205/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Only Came To See Eboue...&lt;/a&gt; and commented: 
I never &#039;reblog&#039;, but in this instance I figure it&#039;s ok to make an exception...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reblogged this on <a href="http://onlycametoseeeboue.wordpress.com/2012/01/28/205/" rel="nofollow">Only Came To See Eboue&#8230;</a> and commented:<br />
I never &#8216;reblog&#8217;, but in this instance I figure it&#8217;s ok to make an exception&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why people care about The Record Industry v. The Customer by Stop SOPA Ireland &#171; A Clatter of the Law</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/2010/10/07/why-people-care-about-the-record-industry-v-the-customer/#comment-1922</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stop SOPA Ireland &#171; A Clatter of the Law]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:09:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aclatterofthelaw.com/?p=755#comment-1922</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] does all of this matter? I again quote Cory Doctorow. … I don’t care if you want to attempt to stop people from copying your [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] does all of this matter? I again quote Cory Doctorow. … I don’t care if you want to attempt to stop people from copying your [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Irish Courts have duty to override religious objections of parents to protect welfare of children by Joe Burns</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/2011/01/13/irish-courts-have-duty-to-override-religious-objections-of-parents-to-protect-welfare-of-children/#comment-1910</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joe Burns]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 01:04:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aclatterofthelaw.com/?p=900#comment-1910</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Iona Institute are not &quot;Opponents&quot; of Children&#039;s Rights, neither are people who are opposed to changing Article 42 of the Constitution. 

Many people object to removing the rights of parents so that the State decides &quot;Best Interests&quot;. Childrenren are autonomous beings, they need boundaries and rules in order to learn. 

I oppose the 28 th Amendment because there is not ONE single right clearly defined in any of the previous drafts. I don&#039;t believe that parents should abrogate their responsibility and duty to parent their children to the State. 

The State have the worst possible record of child abuse and neglect. The &quot;Outcomes&quot; for children of the State are dismal, children are far better of with parents, even the supposedly &quot;bad&quot; ones. A study by Joseph Doyle at MIT over a 12 year period with a sampling size of 15,000 children, the most exhaustive study of it&#039;s kind proves that the State is the worst possible parent. The Outcomes for children of Foster &quot;Care&quot; and Adoption have been studied since 1947 and all point to the same conclusion, children are always better off with parents or extended family if parents are incapable. 

I would love to see all children guaranteed the right to an education, even the Special Needs Children who have suffered so many cutbacks for the last decade to the point that many receive little or no education, despite their right supposedly guaranteed under Article 40. 

I would love to see all children have the right to health care, even the 25 or so children a year whose parents you see on TV or in the media begging the Irish Public for funds to take their child, often to 3rd World Countries to have life-saving operations when the HSE has handed down a death sentence to them. 

The objection of many people boils down to &quot;who decides?&quot; and most people, at least those who have actually read the drafts, are not willing to give up the right to decide their best interests. What passes for a Child &quot;Protection&quot; System in this country is a joke or at least would be if so many children weren&#039;t dying, ending up in jail, or leading chaotic lives. 

Courts have always over-ridden stupid decisions by parents, particularly blood transfusions, too bad they cant get the HSE to pay for life-saving operations to send children outside Ireland for treatment, or speed up waiting lists for children in pain.

 All the altruism and meaninless waffle and declarations that &quot;we love children&quot; wont fix the incompetence in the Health &quot;Care&quot; System or the Foster &quot;Care&quot; System. Changing Article 42 will just make incompetent people any more accountable. It&#039;s about time someone actually measured &quot;Best Interests&quot; because the &quot;Outcomes&quot; proves they are not even paying attention.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Iona Institute are not &#8220;Opponents&#8221; of Children&#8217;s Rights, neither are people who are opposed to changing Article 42 of the Constitution. </p>
<p>Many people object to removing the rights of parents so that the State decides &#8220;Best Interests&#8221;. Childrenren are autonomous beings, they need boundaries and rules in order to learn. </p>
<p>I oppose the 28 th Amendment because there is not ONE single right clearly defined in any of the previous drafts. I don&#8217;t believe that parents should abrogate their responsibility and duty to parent their children to the State. </p>
<p>The State have the worst possible record of child abuse and neglect. The &#8220;Outcomes&#8221; for children of the State are dismal, children are far better of with parents, even the supposedly &#8220;bad&#8221; ones. A study by Joseph Doyle at MIT over a 12 year period with a sampling size of 15,000 children, the most exhaustive study of it&#8217;s kind proves that the State is the worst possible parent. The Outcomes for children of Foster &#8220;Care&#8221; and Adoption have been studied since 1947 and all point to the same conclusion, children are always better off with parents or extended family if parents are incapable. </p>
<p>I would love to see all children guaranteed the right to an education, even the Special Needs Children who have suffered so many cutbacks for the last decade to the point that many receive little or no education, despite their right supposedly guaranteed under Article 40. </p>
<p>I would love to see all children have the right to health care, even the 25 or so children a year whose parents you see on TV or in the media begging the Irish Public for funds to take their child, often to 3rd World Countries to have life-saving operations when the HSE has handed down a death sentence to them. </p>
<p>The objection of many people boils down to &#8220;who decides?&#8221; and most people, at least those who have actually read the drafts, are not willing to give up the right to decide their best interests. What passes for a Child &#8220;Protection&#8221; System in this country is a joke or at least would be if so many children weren&#8217;t dying, ending up in jail, or leading chaotic lives. </p>
<p>Courts have always over-ridden stupid decisions by parents, particularly blood transfusions, too bad they cant get the HSE to pay for life-saving operations to send children outside Ireland for treatment, or speed up waiting lists for children in pain.</p>
<p> All the altruism and meaninless waffle and declarations that &#8220;we love children&#8221; wont fix the incompetence in the Health &#8220;Care&#8221; System or the Foster &#8220;Care&#8221; System. Changing Article 42 will just make incompetent people any more accountable. It&#8217;s about time someone actually measured &#8220;Best Interests&#8221; because the &#8220;Outcomes&#8221; proves they are not even paying attention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Is Ireland ready for a child rights referendum? by Joe Burns</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/2010/02/17/is-ireland-ready-for-a-child-rights-referendum/#comment-1907</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joe Burns]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jan 2012 00:12:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aclatterofthelaw.com/?p=302#comment-1907</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Children&#039;s &quot;Rights&quot; Referendum is purely about 2 things;

1/ Taking away Parents rights to vindicate for their child so that Ireland can be fully compliant on the UNCRC.

2/ Allowing for Forced Adoption as has been policy in the UK.

In the last few drafts, there was not ONE single, clearly defined right for any child. Rights for children already exist in several Statute Laws. 

The bias with Married Parents, which has never really been a barrier to removing children, is due to the Illegitimacy Act of 1933, yes, there are Illegitimate Children in Ireland under the law. 

To say that Children are not protected under Article 42 is dishonest to say the very least. At present 26,200 children are protected by &quot;Care&quot; Orders or Supervision Orders, although 500 are missing so the word &quot;Protected&quot; may be a bit of an exaggeration. 

The UNCRC is no mere statement of Altruism, it is a legally binding International Human Rights Treaty which over-rides all Laws, Constitutional or Statutory, of every country who ratified it. Here is why the USA wont ratify it http://parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&amp;SEC={B56D7393-E583-4658-85E6-C1974B1A57F8}&amp;DE=#_fn14

The Government have also announced a second Children&#039;s &quot;Rights&quot; Referendum which is most likey &quot;putting the Family Courts&quot; on a Constitutional basis&quot;. This should not be supported and teh Family Courts closed the next day in my opinion. See my website NoTo42.blogspot.com

Forced Adoption, putting children up for adoption against the parents wishes is a violation of Article 42 of the Constitution which is another reason for the Referendum. The UK is the only country in Europe who practice this. See Forced-Adoption.com to see what a disaster this has been for children and parents. 

The Child &quot;Protection&quot; Industry, the only growth-industry left in Ireland, costs the taxpayer over €200 million a year. Some &quot;Protected&quot; Children cost the State (Taxpayer) €300,000 a year. There is HUGE money to be made. For every child taken into &quot;Care&quot;, 25 &quot;Professionals&quot;  take a piece of the pie. Cases can cost over a million, and that&#039;s just the legal fees. 

Vote to change Article 42 and see the end of your Parental Authority.18 people in Geneva can change the laws of almost every country in the World, and once Sovereign Countries are powerless to make any law regarding children. Abortion becomes an automatic Right for any child regardless of the views or even knowledge of the parent. I&#039;m not opposed to  Abortion but many Irish People are. This is just one of the many surprises in store for every parent in Ireland if Article 42 is changed.

Joe Burns
Dublin, Ireland.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Children&#8217;s &#8220;Rights&#8221; Referendum is purely about 2 things;</p>
<p>1/ Taking away Parents rights to vindicate for their child so that Ireland can be fully compliant on the UNCRC.</p>
<p>2/ Allowing for Forced Adoption as has been policy in the UK.</p>
<p>In the last few drafts, there was not ONE single, clearly defined right for any child. Rights for children already exist in several Statute Laws. </p>
<p>The bias with Married Parents, which has never really been a barrier to removing children, is due to the Illegitimacy Act of 1933, yes, there are Illegitimate Children in Ireland under the law. </p>
<p>To say that Children are not protected under Article 42 is dishonest to say the very least. At present 26,200 children are protected by &#8220;Care&#8221; Orders or Supervision Orders, although 500 are missing so the word &#8220;Protected&#8221; may be a bit of an exaggeration. </p>
<p>The UNCRC is no mere statement of Altruism, it is a legally binding International Human Rights Treaty which over-rides all Laws, Constitutional or Statutory, of every country who ratified it. Here is why the USA wont ratify it <a href="http://parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&#038;SEC=" rel="nofollow">http://parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&#038;SEC=</a>{B56D7393-E583-4658-85E6-C1974B1A57F8}&amp;DE=#_fn14</p>
<p>The Government have also announced a second Children&#8217;s &#8220;Rights&#8221; Referendum which is most likey &#8220;putting the Family Courts&#8221; on a Constitutional basis&#8221;. This should not be supported and teh Family Courts closed the next day in my opinion. See my website NoTo42.blogspot.com</p>
<p>Forced Adoption, putting children up for adoption against the parents wishes is a violation of Article 42 of the Constitution which is another reason for the Referendum. The UK is the only country in Europe who practice this. See Forced-Adoption.com to see what a disaster this has been for children and parents. </p>
<p>The Child &#8220;Protection&#8221; Industry, the only growth-industry left in Ireland, costs the taxpayer over €200 million a year. Some &#8220;Protected&#8221; Children cost the State (Taxpayer) €300,000 a year. There is HUGE money to be made. For every child taken into &#8220;Care&#8221;, 25 &#8220;Professionals&#8221;  take a piece of the pie. Cases can cost over a million, and that&#8217;s just the legal fees. </p>
<p>Vote to change Article 42 and see the end of your Parental Authority.18 people in Geneva can change the laws of almost every country in the World, and once Sovereign Countries are powerless to make any law regarding children. Abortion becomes an automatic Right for any child regardless of the views or even knowledge of the parent. I&#8217;m not opposed to  Abortion but many Irish People are. This is just one of the many surprises in store for every parent in Ireland if Article 42 is changed.</p>
<p>Joe Burns<br />
Dublin, Ireland.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Background checks by spartacus workout muse</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/2010/02/25/background-checks/#comment-1772</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[spartacus workout muse]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 07:36:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aclatterofthelaw.com/?p=333#comment-1772</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for your suggestions. One thing Ive got noticed is that banks along with financial institutions know the dimensions and spending behavior of consumers and also understand that a lot of people max out their cards around the breaks. They smartly take advantage of this fact and commence flooding ones inbox and snail-mail box with hundreds of no-interest APR credit card offers soon after the holiday season finishes. Knowing that for anyone who is like 98% of all American community, youll jump at the one opportunity to consolidate credit debt and shift balances to 0 interest rate credit cards.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your suggestions. One thing Ive got noticed is that banks along with financial institutions know the dimensions and spending behavior of consumers and also understand that a lot of people max out their cards around the breaks. They smartly take advantage of this fact and commence flooding ones inbox and snail-mail box with hundreds of no-interest APR credit card offers soon after the holiday season finishes. Knowing that for anyone who is like 98% of all American community, youll jump at the one opportunity to consolidate credit debt and shift balances to 0 interest rate credit cards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Graduated response now de facto law in Ireland by Battle of the Bakers: Round 2 (and an interesting update re Round 1) &#171; A Clatter of the Law</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/2010/04/19/graduated-response-now-de-facto-law-in-ireland/#comment-1765</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Battle of the Bakers: Round 2 (and an interesting update re Round 1) &#171; A Clatter of the Law]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 11:56:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aclatterofthelaw.com/?p=433#comment-1765</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] is reminiscent of the refusal of the Data Protection Commissioner to involve his office in the EMI v. eircom case. Ironically, he recently went on to order eircom to halt the three-strikes system which [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is reminiscent of the refusal of the Data Protection Commissioner to involve his office in the EMI v. eircom case. Ironically, he recently went on to order eircom to halt the three-strikes system which [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Damages for misleading commercial practices by Battle of the Bakers: Round 2 (and an interesting update re Round 1) &#171; A Clatter of the Law</title>
		<link>http://aclatterofthelaw.com/2011/04/05/damages-for-misleading-commercial-practices/#comment-1764</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Battle of the Bakers: Round 2 (and an interesting update re Round 1) &#171; A Clatter of the Law]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 11:56:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aclatterofthelaw.com/?p=1029#comment-1764</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] legislation, arguably ignoring that the 2007 Act was supposed to be just that (I wrote about it here in April 2011). The 2007 Act was quite significant, but appears to have been barely used, [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] legislation, arguably ignoring that the 2007 Act was supposed to be just that (I wrote about it here in April 2011). The 2007 Act was quite significant, but appears to have been barely used, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
