Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "Voice to Parliament referendum to be ‘a high hurdle to clear’" video.

  1. Not even after reading the 500 page detailed document presented to government. Yep that sums up your level of knowledge.
    4
  2.  @ma-li3935  You fundamentally misunderstand the function of a representative democracy and constitutional recognition. A elected politician to the house of reps represents their electorate and in the senate their state, not any specific cultural group within. Having said that do you believe a lawyer elected to parliament represents all lawyers in Australia? If so you are just wrong. Constitutional recognition erases the racist elements of our constitution for good.
    3
  3. Jacinta Price was elected to represent all of her persons in her Territory in the senate. She was not elected to represent one particular cultural group. Do you have any understanding of our parliamentary democracy at all?
    3
  4.  @TheRealBobSmith.  So you freely admitted to fraud. Good one. Just a petty criminal then?
    2
  5. Why do you think it is any of your business about what two consenting adults chose to do, and WTF has that got to do with constitutional recognition for indigenous people?
    2
  6. How is removing racism from our constitution divisive?
    2
  7.  @binks7988  Put a case forward and lobby the Australian people. Personally I think those Chinese who came to Australia during the gold rush and then were denied a say in Federation were treated pretty shabbily. There was no doubt an element of racism involved and our white Australia policy proves it.
    2
  8.  @echelon2k8  Yes and those who arrived in the first fleet were represented during the consultations, debates, and referendums leading up to and including the constitution and Federation. The indigenous population were explicitly excluded by being declared non citizens and denied any voting rights..
    2
  9.  @gulaggreens296  Real clever. Claim I’m a bot because you can’t put together a coherent argument.
    2
  10.  @WarwickkkT101  There is already a 500 page document associated with the Uluṟu statement that gives you all the detail, read it. Constitutional recognition of the original inhabitants is not in any way racist merely an acknowledgement that a group of people existed here before Federation. They were specifically left out of the original constitution as they were not recognised as citizens or allowed to vote on federation or the constitution.
    2
  11.  @echelon2k8  Read my second comment in the thread. To correct past injustice and to formally recognise the indigenous population as the original inhabitants. Simple.
    1
  12. There is a 500 page document attached to the Uluṟu statement with detail up your arse if you weren’t so obtuse. Remain blissfully ignorant it is obviously easier for you.
    1
  13. Unlike the rights indigenous Australians had at Federation, no right to vote, no citizenship. WTF have you any knowledge of Australian history?
    1
  14. That’s exactly how our constitution was written. No indigenous representation or consultation. If fact they were specifically left out as they were not allowed to vote as citizenship was denied to them. Yeah right you haven’t a clue about how our constitution was formed. Your level of ignorance is staggering.
    1
  15.  @axle.australian.patriot  👍
    1
  16.  @Design_no  Firstly there is no extra privileges and WTF has culture got to do with race. You have made it clear you think it is about race, why I have no idea. Constitutional recognition erases a currently inherently racist document.
    1
  17.  @axle.australian.patriot  We have bashed heads before on a number of issues and I have total respect for your opinion on this issue I just disagree with you. I also lived in Darwin for 9 years and traveled extensively in the NT with work and witnessed some terrible examples of of racism. This is something the indigenous community want and I am inclined to agree with them.
    1
  18.  @WarwickkkT101  Alleged racism!!! You are being deliberately obstuse. Read the early Hansard editions, the language of our early political leaders is explicitly racist.
    1
  19.  @axle.australian.patriot  Yes I understand your concerns and are not dismissive of them despite some of my rhetoric. I don't think my POV is immature but accept it is highly principled. Yes there will be difficulties in the practical aspects of a voice, but nothing debate and dialogue can't sort out.
    1
  20.  @gulaggreens296  No the government has a multitude of advisory bodies, ie CSIRO, AEC, ATAGI, the indigenous one would just have constitutional certainty, like the right to vote, and religious freedom.
    1
  21.  @gulaggreens296  Read my second comment this explains why.
    1
  22.  @axle.australian.patriot  Well you have accurately described the conditions in which the indigenous population have lived in for the past 132 years. They ask for nothing more than equity under the law. Your slippery slope fallacy is just that. A voice is just that, it will have no legislative ability nor will have a veto power. Nothing to be frightened about and in no way divisive.
    1
  23.  @echelon2k8  No.
    1
  24.  @axle.australian.patriot  Constitutional recognition that people existed here in Australia as a cultural group before Federation a fact our constitution currently denies. Aboriginals were specifically not allowed to be citizens and denied voting rights in their own country.
    1
  25.  @echelon2k8  Except it doesn’t recognise the original inhabitants of the land. The 67 referendum amendments were only a partial fix. Formal constitutional recognition is required for total equality.
    1
  26.  @ma-li3935  Exactly. How do you think land ownership rights work under English common law? You comment is nonsensical gibberish.
    1
  27.  @WarwickkkT101  So people complain there is no detail behind the Uluṟu statement then when that lie is exposed they claim oh it’s all too hard and start in with the conspiracy theories. Great argument, not.
    1
  28.  @echelon2k8  Yes Canada, the US, New Zealand. In fact Australia is one of the few countries that doesn’t have a treaty with the indigenous peoples.
    1
  29.  @WarwickkkT101  I didn’t suggest you did. It was a general comment not a argument, so no strawman exists. It is however a reasonable accurate comment after I have read the numerous ignorant YouTube comments on this issue. I don’t speak for Albo ask him.
    1
  30.  @ma-li3935  No legally and historically wrong. Your opinion is not based on English common law. In fact your opinion it is just nonsense.
    1
  31.  @ma-li3935  Who mentioned race. This is about equality before the law and restoring rights that were taken away with the wording of the original constitution which is specifically racist.
    1
  32.  @ma-li3935  All lives matter. WTF that is a pharse made up by neo nazi right wing extremists in the US. Are you sure this is the talking point you wish to align yourself with, blatant racists. I would delete your comment out of shame if I was you.
    1
  33.  @ma-li3935  it is inherently racist, but if you happy with that fair enough. Using the term black parliament is deliberately mischievous. Your opinion is noted and assessed as such.
    1
  34.  @ma-li3935  Yep that is the opinion of someone who has no idea what an opinion is but please continue to quote the words of ultra right wing racist organisations of which you clearly agree with.
    1
  35.  @ma-li3935  Hey that was well said . I just might change my opinion of you. Well done.
    1
  36.  @ma-li3935  Just to ignore and dismiss a previous culture is the hight of white supremacy
    1
  37. Read the 500 page document associated with the Uluṟu statement from the heart. You won’t because you wish to remain blissfully ignorant.
    1
  38.  @harryricochet8134  A simplistic view. Read the 500 page document associated with the voice. All the detail is there.
    1
  39.  @harryricochet8134  I lot of big words there that added up to vacuous garbage. Read the detailed document and educate yourself. This is what the indigenous peoples want and all this rubbish about hundreds of different groups and languages while true is a deliberate obfuscation by those ignorant and frightened who don’t want equality for the indigenous population.
    1
  40. Vague!!!!! there is a 500 page document attached to the Uluṟu statement with details coming out of your arse. Are you normally this obtuse?
    1
  41.  @gulaggreens296  Who is they? The Australian people?
    1
  42. What a ridiculous assertion without a shred of evidence. The AEC will conduct any referendum as is completely independent from government. Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you genuinely ignorant of how our voting system works?
    1
  43.  @gulaggreens296  A nonsense claim without a shred of evidence. The AEC will conduct the referendum. The AEC is completely independent from government and conducts all our federal election. You would have to provide evidence first to be taken seriously.
    1
  44.  @axle.australian.patriot  No. because they were not that impertinent to demand a specific wording, they merely asked for a dialogue.They left the exact wording up to the Australian people to decide. The PM has publicly announced a suggested wording and is open to refinement.
    1
  45. Read the detailed 500 page document attached to the Uluṟu statement. Nothing vague about it. Your willingness to remain ignorant is astonishing.
    1
  46. You understand the sheer stupidity of your statement as Reagan was answering a question in relation to the spread of the HIV virus. How unbelievably naive and ignorant can you get?
    1