Voice to parliament referendum fails in defeat that Indigenous advocates will see as a blow to progress towards reconciliation

Australians have resoundingly rejected a proposal to recognise Aboriginal people in its constitution and establish a body to advise parliament on Indigenous issues.

Saturday’s voice to parliament referendum failed, with the defeat clear shortly after polls closed.

  • @[email protected]English
    -14•1 year ago

    The only people I have personally seen lying are ‘Yes’ supporters. For instance, I’ve seen none of this ‘veto’ nonsense that is allegedly being spread everywhere. The only ‘No’ pamphlets I received were pretty bloody accurate representations.

    In your two replies to me you’ve created three different straw men; I don’t think you need to worry about other people lying.

    • TheDankHold
      6•1 year ago

      If you haven’t seen it then it clearly doesn’t exist lol. Argument from anecdotal evidence is a huge logical fallacy.

      You talk about rhetorical fallacies like you understand how to use them and it’s hilarious. You’re right though I should be more concerned with morons like you that eat up fallacious thinking.

      • @[email protected]English
        -3•1 year ago

        Sharing my personal experience that I haven’t personally been lied to is not a logical fallacy. Also, the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim, not the one negating it. You and other ‘Yes’ supporters can’t go two minutes without claiming that, “THEY’RE SPREADING LIES!!!”, yet can never seem to back it up. You’d much rather wave your dick in the air calling everyone but your reflection a moron.

        • TheDankHold
          4•1 year ago

          It’s been backed up by a recent comment. It speaks volumes though that instead of reading the language of the bill to clarify you just throw out fallacies to defend your interpretation.

          You’re claiming that an advisory body existing is racist and clearly don’t understand that this advisory body has no legislative power. It literally exists to just give opinions to actual lawmakers. That’s just one misrepresentation that people like you eat up uncritically.

          • @[email protected]English
            -4•1 year ago

            Oh, it was backed up by ‘a recent comment’? Thank goodness that’s cleared up. /s

            Also, note that my original comment that you replied to explicitly used the wording from the proposed amendment that it was an advisory body that would make representations to parliament. Using the actual wording is hardly a misrepresentation. If my wording upset you, then maybe you should have voted ‘No’.

            • TheDankHold
              1•1 year ago

              You used the actual wording yes but your understanding of the bill is still vapid.

              It’s not race based and has no legal power to enforce anything. I’m not upset by the original wording. I’m bothered by your stubborn refusal to look at this beyond your previously conceived value judgements.

              And yes, another comment sourced you information you shoved off your high chair like a toddler because they didn’t chew it up for you so you could swallow the mash without thinking too hard about chewing. Congrats on the snark, it’s the only thing you’re good at.