People can challenge it, but that's incredibly hard. In this comment political landscape, do you really imagine that the Constitution would be changed at all, let alone in any meaningful way? You're right, the framework is there, but without significant upheaval, would it be changed?
dragonflyteaparty
joined 2 years ago
This is the shadow it made through our tree.
Australians vote No in referendum that promised change for First Nations people but couldn’t deliver
From the article it seemed that a big criticism of the amendment was that it was too vague. There were people from different political beliefs and some aboriginals who didn't like how vague it was, though the aboriginals wanted it to further.
Huh, in the US we use it as a term for a violent group of people. Does it not mean that in Australia?
I think it's the idea that military families have the issue at higher rates, not that no one else does.
Because he's a name people recognize, people like him, and, as much as I don't like it, Trump's name in articles gets clicks. Maybe you view it as more of a tabloid article, but if you could maybe stop being so argumentative about it for ten or fifteen seconds, you'd realize the man actually said something pretty damn good. And made you'd think the same of Joe Schmoo down the street if you paused to listen. Not everyone needs to be an expert in order to speak and have a platform.
Ours has a function where you press and hold one of the numbers and it turns off the beeps. Not sure what it is anymore, but most people should be able to look it up and find one for their microwave.
Or the cops told him that they had plenty of evidence to convict, scared him with a lengthy prison sentence, and he chose a plea deal because he viewed it as exactly that, a deal for a lesser punishment.
Sure, but I don't really think that pertains to the parents here. It's the dad's family who's hardcore Christians.
No, actually they're not. One paragraph about the in-laws, particularly the mother-in-law, does not characterize the whole situation or the birth mother. What does, though, is the mother-in-law stating that she'll support the birth mother's decision no matter what. Did you miss that bit?
Permafrost is already melting in alarming amounts. We'd probably have to take drastic action immediately. I don't mean in a few years or a decade. Now like, this year. But that's not going to happen.
This is all under the idea that every vote is counted 100% equally in every stance. The idea ignores how presidential primaries start on the east side of the country and the western side has the choices limited by the eastern. It ignores the electoral college, gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisment, voter suppression, misinformation, manipulation by other countries, and probably a bunch more I think can't of right now. One of the most reductive ideas I've ever heard is "you get what you vote for". If that were actually true, everything I listed above wouldn't exist.