Talk:Neasa Hourigan

NMH Catholic Church Reference
Hi User:Bastun

I'm not sure what the process is with discussing changes, I didn't want to just revert edits

With respect to this revision https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neasa_Hourigan&oldid=1148156991

I'm not sure which article you're talking about. I can't see any article that says the land is owned by the Catholic Church? The Irish Times article explicitly says the site is owned by St Vincent’s Holdings. The Religious Sisters of Charity (who are not the Catholic Church in any case) don't have a shareholding in that company.

If there's no source that says the site is owned by the Catholic Church then surely the article should be corrected?

I'll leave it with you. PaschalNee (talk) 12:53, 4 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi Paschal. Bringing it to talk is absolutely the best way to go (per WP:BRD). So, the issue for me is: what is central to Hourigan and Costello voting in favour of the SF motion? The answer isn't that the land is owned by the state, it's the fear that because of the Catholic ethos still espoused by St Vincent's Holdings, then potentially abortions and fertility treatments may not be permitted. That is covered quite well in the second reference (the Irish Times one). The whole issue has been very widely covered in the media, and the issues are well understood. Limiting the sentence to "a site leased by the State" is being disingenous to readers, as that does not explain the issue. I think my edit covers your concern, but I'd be willing to change "a site ultimately leased from the Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 13:37, 4 April 2023 (UTC)