• Whirlybird@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    That seems to be the problem after reading these - there is no clarity by design of the government. They aren’t telling us what the thing we’re voting on actually is.

    • hitmyspot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      In a way it needs to be like that. If we are voting on the detail, which can be changed, people will feel misled. Were voting on the concept only.

      • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately we’re voting on them to put something that we don’t know the details on into the constitution, something that is not taken lightly. I’d kinda like to know.

        • billytheid@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          it’s been explained to you clearly and concisely here. If you’re too stupid, listen to legal experts or better yet, well regarded constitutional lawyers(they’re all yes voters)

          • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You really need to stop this “the only right vote is a yea vote” holier than thou garbage. You realise that you’re telling indigenous people that they’re bigots and wrong for voting no, don’t you?

            • billytheid@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s hardly garbage to assert that bigots are bad people, moreover I’m saying indigenous people voting no are looked at as cookers(not bigots). Try to read before responding please.