cro_angel
<3<3<3
why SKA?
Republic (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Cape
- Start date
Rorix
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2003
- Messages
- 1,818
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2005
For the general laziness I went into before. Technically, he probably should have called you a lazy-ass, but insults are supposed to be straight from the heart.
Yes, but the sad thing is, your vote is worth just as much as the vote of one who couldn't name one policy of either party, or something of the sort.
Bottom line is that when we decided on a referendum (mainly driven by Turnbull) we weren't ready. Not only that, but it didnt have government support (or at least they stayed well clear of it)
Everything is fine, we cant complain about the constitution.
It has nothing to do with 'breaking away from england' or 'becoming free', we've had both those things for a long time (in case you didnt notice). I think it is all in a name and the facts are that it's not worth the time and resources required.
In fact, some people might be happy with the royal family and all they represent and how they ground who we essentially are.
I think that there is nothing to fear as long as QE2 reigns.
Everything is fine, we cant complain about the constitution.
It has nothing to do with 'breaking away from england' or 'becoming free', we've had both those things for a long time (in case you didnt notice). I think it is all in a name and the facts are that it's not worth the time and resources required.
In fact, some people might be happy with the royal family and all they represent and how they ground who we essentially are.
I think that there is nothing to fear as long as QE2 reigns.
cro_angel
<3<3<3
exactly.. thats what i meant
the queen doesnt do anything for us so it wont be that much different if shes gone... so why bother
what else would have to change besides currency and flag
would we have to rename the states? lol
SKA
me and my baby
excuse me???
1 im not a boy
2 whats there to be happy about.. the fact that ur an asshole.??? n u think that ur always right?
SKA
me and my baby
sorry rorix if u see a difference in calling me a dumb arse instead of a lazy arse??? do u think it makes it ne more less insulting?
SKA
me and my baby
well not every1 wants to vote.... so those that dont want to will just write down anything.. which means they couldnt care less who gets into power and in cases wen the voting is close... one party might win... but only because of those few that jsut put anything.... its possible
and besides.. if u couldnt care less than why do they care what u think
SKA
me and my baby
no .. i am implying that... the person that comes into power should be what the people want.
n the people that dont care just put anything n that effects the voting for the people that do care??
god do i make sense???]
i cant think of how to explain it
n the people that dont care just put anything n that effects the voting for the people that do care??
god do i make sense???]
i cant think of how to explain it
cro_angel
<3<3<3
well i heard somewhere that in america the majority of voters are senior because they do it on weekdays so people arent bothered going to vote..
if we do turn republic i hope we dont follow that lead and have the over 65s deciding our government.. its bad enough
if we do turn republic i hope we dont follow that lead and have the over 65s deciding our government.. its bad enough
SKA
me and my baby
no but cro.... if they really worried then they would be bothered to vote
SKA
me and my baby
woooshka... i tryed making sense outta that..sorry... im dumb
Very unfair.
SKA, a referendum is a change to consitution under Section 128 or Chapter 8. You need to ensure that all legible Australians vote, most have proven over time that Australia is conservative nation, only 8 referendums have been agreed to, many put to the people twice, including Federation and the removal of Section 127.
Often enough in democracies, people do not want to be politically involved because they feel a current system works fine, that's why Oppositions don't win, Government's lose. You imply that people should have a burden via indirect fear should be forced to vote, whilst in our current system all must vote, limiting the unfair advantage of the minority getting more support becuase they were the only ones who turned up. Your attitude - Bad luck! Not responsible and un-Australian.
You will never get a republic so long as you nit-pick.
SKA
me and my baby
hmmmm maybe u have a point
but hey...
last year i worked at the election poll thing or maybe it was the yr before....
i worked with these two guys n we had to unfold all the voting sheets... it was funny.. some people wrote some really funny things on it and others drew pictures...lol...they pretend to vote?
but hey...
last year i worked at the election poll thing or maybe it was the yr before....
i worked with these two guys n we had to unfold all the voting sheets... it was funny.. some people wrote some really funny things on it and others drew pictures...lol...they pretend to vote?
SKA
me and my baby
oh n just to add to that.. some1 wrote on the paper
that voting shouldnt be compulsory
that voting shouldnt be compulsory
OK, I will restate it.
You say that people should have a person they want as a leader, they do, they voted into our Legislature a Prime Minister via representatives and via proportional voting into the Senate, a similar system in the states. Under the constitution, politicians have Parliamentary Sovereignty, that is they are the supreme Legislative Law makers. However under the Doctrine of the Seperation of Powers, there is a division between the Legislature (Parliament), the Executive (Government Departments By-Law makers) and the Judiciary (courts through judgements/precedents).
The Crown currently unites these, not Elizabeth Windsor. If we elected a representative, our courts would be influenced by a popular figurehead who has elections to worry about. THis is called the Greatest good for the greatest number, meaning a decision been made because a majority support it, something that a parliament should do at times in moral issues especially, but in terms of courts, it should not be centred upon. Such practice will mean courts are criticised and this comprehends the Rule of Law.
My argument is, that your system is about overturning our current safeguards, all in the name of, Australia's so called independance which we already under legislation and constitution have, with the argument that we should have a popular leader - very unfair.
