Carlton Supporters Club

this is what I said :

I think there is more than enough time to do your bit, even with the plethora of causes that exist in what is IMO a broken world. You don't have to give your life to a cause, but there are plenty of things to be done, even if they're only small.

I emphasize small gestures that are manageable by the average person, and you come out with a hit list that no human could ever meet, and then say I'm a hypocrite. Righto then.

If that's the case, then why not come out and say it, instead of hiding behind some flaky Theological pretense ? It's been obvious all along. All of us are motivated by a need for security, a need to belong, all of us seek validation and acceptance by our tribe and our community. Nobody wants to be ostracized. Being the lone dissenter is worse for some people than being the spare pr1ck at a Jewish wedding. I get it.

So if you don't support the pride jumper, and you don't oppose the pride jumper, this means what exactly ?

Its a quicker version of the same point.

I could ask, what have you done in your life to......Save the whales?
etc etc etc
Until it gets to the point where you haven't done anything. Then i can call you a hypocrite as you said there was time for all the causes.
There simply isn't and no matter which way you slice it, there is simply too much to care about in the world to focus on it all..............................

If you can't be bothered reading what I actually wrote, or if your comprehension skills have slipped since I last frequented these forums, then there's not much to say. 

I think there is more than enough time to do your bit, even with the plethora of causes that exist in what is IMO a broken world. You don't have to give your life to a cause, but there are plenty of things to be done, even if they're only small.

Someone had to start this new conversation given the talk about an Indigenous voice in parliament. 

I want to state that I have no opposition to an indigenous voice in parliament up front, so people can understand that what I am about to state next, doesn't come from anywhere but a genuine confusion on what this whole shemozzle of an idea is about.

Parliamentary officials, are elected to represent the people and govern on their behalf.  I am genuinely confused, as to why they are now creating a position, which doubles up on their duty.  Indigenous people, have the right to vote, and have the ability to vote for their representatives if they wish to do so.

What exactly is this whole endeavour for, and whom does it benefit?  The answer to me is clear, the pigs at the trough get another position to ensure that no indigenous aspiring politican takes their seat.  Id rather see some indigenous people running for seats in the next election, than simply creating yet another virtue signalled position in government.

The politicians continue to take the mickey out of us and then ride the gravy train into retirement when people are struggling to put food on the table and power their houses in the current economic environment.

^
Nope.  Anyone who votes is represented by the candidate in their electorate.  You have missed my point.

Politicians serve their electorate. 

^
Nope.  Anyone who votes is represented by the candidate in their electorate.  You have missed my point.

Politicians serve their electorate. 

If you were the folks framing this legislation /ammendment you would want to do extensive polling to make sure it would  get up before proceeding. It would be terribly damaging, divisive and disconcerting  to indigenous folk if it failed.