@Anthonywodillon@Briggs I doubt I could offer you any reasons that you have not already heard. Simply put, the best reason for voting yes is that a genuinely consultative Voice will improve government policy decision making.
@Anthonywodillon@Briggs Very good. Given you’re position at the Australian Catholic University I was just drawing parallels to faith seemingly having very little to do with the head.
@Anthonywodillon@Briggs Your statement as to why you will be voting no is probably where I disagree with you most. It seems an easy argument to say no to anything that hasn’t proven itself before it’s given that opportunity to do so.
@Briggs@Anthonywodillon And how would you define faith, Anthony?
A bit of heart never goes astray, sadly lacking in some. I’m quite confident I have listened to many people smarter than me to also inform my head to vote yes.
@marquelawyers@JaneCaro Genuine question, given the presumption of innocence, wouldn’t a better change be that no one is named for any crime until they are convicted?
@FL480@GillianannF@JaneCaro I think it is simple if you disregard the BS. What is complicated about a consultative body? Governments should consult and the Voice would ensure that our First Nations people are consulted. Simples!
@JohnSmi32437046@JaneCaro The Voice would be a consultative body, the elected government would determine how it operates. This referendum would not insert an undemocratic body into government as you initially stated.