Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "'Don't be fooled': Labor pushing Australians towards 'apartheid' with the Voice" video.

Perfectly, not a single issue. Just basic human rights.
2
@jasoreed Look fair enough I’m not a lawyer and can only go by my extensive reading of the issue. My hope is the indigenous community get constitutional recognition, a voice, a Makkaratta commission, and a treaty. I truely believe all these things are possible and our country will grow and mature.
2
What privileges?
2
Keep that spirit up.
1
Testing how?
1
@fruckya What do you expect a DNA test to show?
1
@fruckya You do understand that an Australian Aboriginal genome doesn’t exist. What you are asking for is scientifically impossible.
1
@fruckya Yes, and what do you think it will show?
1
I’ll answer them
1
@seaworldsocialartslecturer4160 Yes and how stupid and glib you can be on youtube comments. A right you have exercised to the fullest.
1
@seaworldsocialartslecturer4160 Yes it is the height of stupidity to suggest that cake decorating skills as appreciated as they are and I might add food preparation is an honourable profession is in anyway the equivalent of the rights of two consenting adults to form a legal bond. Nobody has the right to prepare food for the public, there are at least minimum food handling procedures to learn and be certified in. Everybody has right to choose whoever they want to be their partner. Is is so unfortunate in this day and age this needs to be explained to you.
1
@seaworldsocialartslecturer4160 Why should gay people keep anything in the bedroom? Our society and culture is full of overt heterosexuality. Why do they only deserve that privilege? Where and when in Australia has anybody been forced or denied cake decorating rights. I know of one case in the US where the US Supreme Court sided with a baker who didn't want to decorate a gay wedding cake for religious belief. The word marriage pops up in middle England around 1200CE and has its origins in French and Latin. It isn't owned by religious organisations. Your argument is a non sequitur and fallacious nonsense.
1
@mariafewster4127 The old slippery slope argument. Pure fallacious nonsense.
1
@vemister WTF are you talking about. We had a national plebiscite that showed a overwhelming majority of Australians approved of same sex marriage. Legislation was then put before the parliament and it passed both houses with a majority. Are you even Australian?
1
Nope, factually incorrect, sovereignty could be worked out wholly in Australia by the federal government and indigenous groups.
1
@jasoreed Unfortunately his legal opinion is incorrect. Sovereignty and treaty agreements have been conducted successfully internationally on multiple occasions in New Zealand, Canada, and the US all settler colonial governments. You are just wrong.
1
@jasoreed Yep totally agree. Total consensus is unachievable, however as the Uluṟu statement showed overwhelming majority agreement is possible.
1
@jasoreed 280 elders signed the Uluru statement. They represented all indigenous groups and regions. Approximately 12 indigenous members didn't choose to sign and about half a dozen walked out. That is overwhelming agreement by any standard. You are factually wrong.
1
How about we do the math on white middle aged Anglo men and see how they are represented in the federal parliament.
1
Yes convicted by a court.
1
@seaworldsocialartslecturer4160 Nope. However even a 9 year old child understands the difference a white man with money gets in justice from the legal system and a person with no resources. OMG how stupidly naive are you?
1
@seaworldsocialartslecturer4160 No that is fallacious argumentation called anecdotal evidence. You assume because it happened to you that is they way it always happens. It is nonsensical and completely fallacious. Indigenous people have to apply for legal assistance the same as you. Your argument is further made nonsensical by just the most cursory of reading the data on Indigenous arrests and incarceration rates. Indigenous men are 12.5 times more likely to be incarcerated than non indigenous and women 21.2 times more likely. Indigenous men represent 27% of the national prison population and women 34%. Your argument has so many holes in it it is leaking out your ears. I have never read such idiotic comments.
1
@seaworldsocialartslecturer4160 So in making a fallacious anecdotal argument you then move to a fallacious strawman argument. I never mentioned anything about deaths in custody, gender wage gap, suicide gap ( I don’t even know what that is), or an incarceration gap, again I don’t know what that is. For 3% of the population to make up a third of the prison population and that doesn’t strike you as odd. Then unfortunately you are truely clueless. All you have presented is fallacious nonsensical opinion devoid of any facts or data. I’m sure you feel it is true. Best we leave it at that before you make yourself look even more foolish.
1
Firstly read and research Apartheid in South Africa and then explain how in any possible way it equates to an advisory body to government with no veto power, no legislative capability, and no financial delegation. You are talking out of your arse.
1
Exactly how I’d expect a white supremacist to comment.
1
You don’t really understand language do you. Ever hear someone say they are battling cancer or the “war” on drugs. Dont be such a melodramatic goose.
1
@muffineck9890 oh I agree she is an arsehole, and then some. Let's just be the sensible ones hey!.
1
@brettralph3403 Actually you are factually wrong. Cook admits in his writings that the fires intensified as he made his way north up the coastline. This notification by signal fire is now accepted internationally and by our own constitutional and legal experts as a sign of sovereignty. The aboriginals knew they were here. Sovereignty is a complex legal concept. Sovereignty has already been claimed by the Australian government, in that respect there is no going back, however treaty and negotiations about indigenous sovereignty can take place with the federal government and agreements potentially can be meet. Both indigenous sovereignty and Commonwealth sovereignty can coexist. It is complex but possible. Read up on it.
1
What damage?
1
@jimbob-f2y L&H seems to be of the opinion that settler colonial governments can’t have treaties with indigenous groups. L&H is of course demonstrably wrong on this, as it has been achieved on numerous occasions.
1
@rayklein1125 And your evidence of this is?
1
Good
1
Why?
1
Well they support a two state solution, that is fundamentally different to apartheid in South Africa. Not even Israel itself supports a one state solution.
1