Our NRL Club and The Voice

[Jacks Fur Coat]

i'm voting yes. i don't believe i have any aboriginal heritage but this is a sensible, moderate proposal and i want to live in a country that acts sensibly. the crux of the referendum is that it will acknowledge that the ancestors of some living australians lived in australia for tens of thousands of years. it's about constitutional recognition of that fact. whether you tacked on the voice is neither here or there for me but the voice will have no more power than a senate committee, and might do some good.

if the voice fails the issue won't go away and that might involve world indigenous groups taking australia to u.n. councils. who knows, it might involve civil unrest in australia. best to vote yes for a sensible, moderate proposal.

What issue?

[zac]

Your last paragraph is fear mongering at its worst

fear mongering at its worst! what about the fear mongering on the other side about high court challeges etc.? but like i said, this issue won't go away and there will be repercussions if the referendum isn't passed.

[zac]

fear mongering at its worst! what about the fear mongering on the other side about high court challeges etc.? but like i said, this issue won't go away and there will be repercussions if the referendum isn't passed.

i noticed your comment about likening aborigines to the judeans in the monty python script ... on this site there's a lot of hate v souths about them taking the land east of anzac parade and fair enough. how is us taking the land of the original australians any different? given it involved the whole country some might argue it was more significant

[rented tracksuit]

It's a worry that this is going to a referendum where people may not understand the implications, or worse still, feel obliged to vote 'Yes' lest they be deemed racist.

Ironically the opposite would be true. Such a constitutional amendment sadly would have the direct effect of dividing our country by race. Apartheid lines. New Zealand have already gone down that path. We dont need that sort of division here.

Enormous power and influence would be vested in 24 unelected representatives who can 'advise' the government on basically any policy or proposed legislation. And if they dont get their way they can toddle to the High Court at taxpayers expense.

Most importantly Indigenous peoples are already well represented by our elected members and bodies. So are people from all different races and cultures who make up Australia. We don't need another layer to create an imbalance of priorities or power along racial lines, and definitely not enshrined in our constitution.

Will it help one child from being assaulted in Indigenous communities? No.
Does it keep the focus on this issue rather than people struggling with costs of living and energy prices? Yep.

Just my two bobs worth.

Good post.

[rented tracksuit]

Your last paragraph is fear mongering at its worst

So true and there is plenty of that going on. Labelling and name calling have already started from the yes crowd.

[mightyrooster]

I’m still confused on the whole thing. I need more certainty on what it is we will actually end up with.

[Andrew Walker]

I’m still confused on the whole thing. I need more certainty on what it is we will actually end up with.

That is something we will not get Nobody in their right mind votes or agrees to something they are unsure about or are not given the full details

[Andrew Walker]

So true and there is plenty of that going in. Labelling and name calling have already started from the yes crowd.

Yes we experienced this first hand in here with Sally on Saturday

[zac]

That is something we will not get Nobody in their right mind votes or agrees to something they are unsure about or are not given the full details

you're a yes voter for this but you don't realise it yet.
this proposal isn't about control, about elites telling other people what to do, it's what aborigines getting together at uluru and saying what they want. what they want is reasonable.
it would be bad for the referendum to approve a specific model. better to let the elected parliament decide and, if necessary, modify things. hopefully in fifty years the gap will be narrowed and the voice will become less significant

[mightyrooster]

That is something we will not get Nobody in their right mind votes or agrees to something they are unsure about or are not given the full details

This is why I need to get my head around it more. I don’t like to just abstain or say no simply because I don’t understand the proposal. But that’s exactly what could end up happening as I’m still confused.

[rented tracksuit]

That is something we will not get Nobody in their right mind votes or agrees to something they are unsure about or are not given the full details

We won’t be given the full details. To be given the full details means a NO vote will be successful.

[rented tracksuit]

Yes we experienced this first hand in here with Sally on Saturday

I must of missed that but not surprised the woke king of labelling would have been at its finest.

[Andrew Walker]

I must of missed that but not surprised the woke king of labelling would have been at its finest.

LOL you brought it to my attention

[rented tracksuit]

LOL you brought it to my attention

Happy to help mate!

[A Country Member]

Latrell faked his injury. Will play club footy this weekend