Toast Proud of our Club

[dusty1234!]

Incredibly proud of our club for taking a stance on this. A brave decision, but one I feel strongly is the right decision.
As mentioned, our club is richer and better for our proud connection with the Indigenous community, their brothers and sisters.
Well done Richmond for always being a strong, progressive club.

 

[RockJobster0312]

I want to get in first because this sort of stance will bring out the ‘sports and politics’ don’t mix/ ‘I watch sport to get away from politics’ crowd.

Firstly, sports and politics - especially in the matters of race and racial recognition - has been a staple of sport of decades. The era of sports and politics being separate was gone when the likes of Texas Western fielding all black players in the college final. The likes of Jackie Robinson breaking barriers in Major League Baseball. Or NBA players themselves in effect boycotting a game in protest to the slaying of black minorities. There are many more examples. Those days where politics and sports don’t mix are long gone.

Second, how can a club which employs First Nations people, not just players but coaches and administrators not show outward support for a matter that is directly related to them? Who would want to work in a workplace that doesn’t support its staff?

Third, unfortunately First Nations players (including our own) are subject to the most vile racial abuse on an almost weekly basis. We can put it down to keyboard warriors, or uneducated sloths but that doesn’t blunt the impact it has on those who are subject to that hate. How can the club justify not doing anything it can to support First Nations peoples without supporting what most see as its most important moment in recent years?

Sorry about the rant, but it’s something that really grates at me. Whatever your believes about the Voice are, they’re your own. But don’t criticize the club (as some have done on Twitter; and not just to the RFC’s support) for showing support to First Nations people’s which are at the very heart and fabric of this club and this clubs history.

 

[Danw0w]

I am happy for the club to take a stance on issues as a long as it reflects the genuine views of the players.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

There's the problem right there..."We recognise and respect people's right to form their own views"
Well that just goes agin the AFL's Old Boys Club's views...

 

[Boston tiger]

If it’s been driven by our indigenous mob then I think it’s a smart move. Look after your indigenous and then everything looks after itself . That sort of thing.

 

[SplintWhisky]

Incredibly proud of our club for taking a stance on this. A brave decision, but one I feel strongly is the right decision.
As mentioned, our club is richer and better for our proud connection with the Indigenous community, their brothers and sisters.
Well done Richmond for always being a strong, progressive club.

Is it a good decision - Yes
Is it brave - No

Taking a position that only fringe groups and nut jobs (i.e. Queenslanders) will loudly oppose is not really brave. Brave would be actually opposing the voice as it would be going against the majority and also the indigenous players and staff within the club. Making a decision that puts everything on the line is brave.

This is akin to the club coming out and saying they are against punting babies.

 

[Tigarmy]

Is it a good decision - Yes
Is it brave - No

Taking a position that only fringe groups and nut jobs (i.e. Queenslanders) will loudly oppose is not really brave. Brave would be actually opposing the voice as it would be going against the majority and also the indigenous players and staff within the club. Making a decision that puts everything on the line is brave.

This is akin to the club coming out and saying they are against punting babies.

I disagree - it is Leadership. In a space that so many will remain silent on. It is using a position of strength to help those that need a hand. It is using a platform to promote respect and humanity.


Sent from some place else…

 

[tigerisland]

I am confident no one here or at the the club has ever read the Calma Langton report which our PM says spells out the details. You can download it here. Indigenous voice co-design process: final report to the Australian Government
The voice will only divide rather than unite Australia. Brave Aboriginal leaders like Jacinta Price and Warren Mundine have seen out against this divisive policy.
For all those who think this is the right call please read the proposal in full.
The club should run a million miles from this.
For all those who scream you are ill-informed or a bigot or anything else for not agreeing with this proposal read the voices of those who descent. Such as former appeals court judge Terence Coe, Labor MPs Gary John’s or Graham Richardson.
Everyone wants to better the lives of our First Nations people. The voice will not do that. It will re create the aboriginal elite that gave us the disastrous ATSIC.
Footy should bring us together, not tear us apart. Club simply must stay out of politics.

 

[Al Heimer]

There's the problem right there..."We recognise and respect people's right to form their own views"
Well that just goes agin the AFL's Boys Club's views...

Jak my mate, the suits at AFL HQ do recognise and respect other people's rights but they laugh and spit them square in the face.

Also sorry for my childish post on this serious thread, I am proud as well.

On SM-J250F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Oldest Tiger]

Is this the decision of 100 thousand members or that of a few administrators? Recognition and Voice are two different issues but lumped together as a single yes/no vote. Are the RFC leaders good people consequently will you give them life tenure? One vote yes/No. Practical implications versus an emotional argument.

 

[RockJobster0312]

I am confident no one here or at the the club has ever read the Calma Langton report which our PM says spells out the details. You can download it here. Indigenous voice co-design process: final report to the Australian Government
The voice will only divide rather than unite Australia. Brave Aboriginal leaders like Jacinta Price and Warren Mundine have seen out against this divisive policy.
For all those who think this is the right call please read the proposal in full.
The club should run a million miles from this.
For all those who scream you are ill-informed or a bigot or anything else for not agreeing with this proposal read the voices of those who descent. Such as former appeals court judge Terence Coe, Labor MPs Gary John’s or Graham Richardson.
Everyone wants to better the lives of our First Nations people. The voice will not do that. It will re create the aboriginal elite that gave us the disastrous ATSIC.
Footy should bring us together, not tear us apart. Club simply must stay out of politics.

I have read the report and I’d be surprised if the club hadn’t read it themselves. It also would have garnered the views of its players, staff and administrators; including those of First Nations people. This isn’t the club saying we think all Richmond supporters should vote yes. It is saying the the club and all its employees support the voice. How you want to vote is up to you.

I’ve also seen the likes of Mundine and Jacinta Price’s arguments against the Voice; I’ve also seen a litany of argument from Indigenous leaders with non-political affiliations (both Mundine and Price are obviously Liberal members; who are obviously leading the No campaign) who are strongly for the ‘yes’ (including for example Eddie Betts).

You’re entitled to your views so I won’t throw names about. There are strong views on both sides, so let’s not simply say read Mundine and Price’s views. Read them all. All sides. Politicians and non-politicians. Indigenous leaders and non-Indigenous Australians. Inform yourself. Reach your own conclusion (you is used in the general sense not specific to you, as it would seem you have done some reading).

Lastly, in terms of dividing or uniting, this is somewhat a moot point. As is footy bringing people together. As true as this would be in a perfect world, there is already divisiveness. Almost (if not) every week a First Nations AFL player is the target of horrendous and vile racial abuse at the footy itself. Or on social media. How many non-First Nations people are subject to such racial abuse? We are already coming from a place of divisiveness. The Voice tries to heal that divide. I’m not naive to think it’ll solve all problems or be the perfect solution, but never had a piece of legislation been airtight or perfect. But I think it’s then right step forward.

Footy as a sanctuary is unfortunately long passed.

Is this the decision of 100 thousand members or that of a few administrators? Recognition and Voice are two different issues but lumped together as a single yes/no vote. Are the RFC leaders good people consequently will you give them life tenure? One vote yes/No. Practical implications versus an emotional argument.

It’s the club’s view. The club as made up of all players, administrators and coaches. The statement includes the recognition that it’s up to each individual to make its own decision.

The club isn’t just 100,000 members. As much as some may not wish to admit it, it’s a club the operates with nearly $100m annually. It is a business and has been for some time.

The club is (rightly IMO) stating that with the First Nations people currently at the club in a variety of roles and those which have been previously been involved with the club, First Nations people are woven into the very fabric of the club. The club as a whole is showing its support for an issue which isn’t just political (it’s social, if not moral) and supporting those currently and the club and those who came before by its belief in the voice.

 

[tigerisland]

I have read the report and I’d be surprised if the club hadn’t read it themselves. It also would have garnered the views of its players, staff and administrators; including those of First Nations people. This isn’t the club saying we think all Richmond supporters should vote yes. It is saying the the club and all its employees support the voice. How you want to vote is up to you.

I’ve also seen the likes of Mundine and Jacinta Price’s arguments against the Voice; I’ve also seen a litany of argument from Indigenous leaders with non-political affiliations (both Mundine and Price are obviously Liberal members; who are obviously leading the No campaign) who are strongly for the ‘yes’ (including for example Eddie Betts).

You’re entitled to your views so I won’t throw names about. There are strong views on both sides, so let’s not simply say read Mundine and Price’s views. Read them all. All sides. Politicians and non-politicians. Indigenous leaders and non-Indigenous Australians. Inform yourself. Reach your own conclusion (you is used in the general sense not specific to you, as it would seem you have done some reading).

Lastly, in terms of dividing or uniting, this is somewhat a moot point. As is footy bringing people together. As true as this would be in a perfect world, there is already divisiveness. Almost (if not) every week a First Nations AFL player is the target of horrendous and vile racial abuse at the footy itself. Or on social media. How many non-First Nations people are subject to such racial abuse? We are already coming from a place of divisiveness. The Voice tries to heal that divide. I’m not naive to think it’ll solve all problems or be the perfect solution, but never had a piece of legislation been airtight or perfect. But I think it’s then right step forward.

Footy as a sanctuary is unfortunately long passed.



It’s the club’s view. The club as made up of all players, administrators and coaches. The statement includes the recognition that it’s up to each individual to make its own decision.

The club isn’t just 100,000 members. As much as some may not wish to admit it, it’s a club the operates with nearly $100m annually. It is a business and has been for some time.

The club is (rightly IMO) stating that with the First Nations people currently at the club in a variety of roles and those which have been previously been involved with the club, First Nations people are woven into the very fabric of the club. The club as a whole is showing its support for an issue which isn’t just political (it’s social, if not moral) and supporting those currently and the club and those who came before by its belief in the voice.

Few people have read the report. It is painfully repetitive and vague. In summary each state and territory will have 2x voice representatives. So ACT will have the same weighting as QLD or NSW despite representing a fraction of the people. There does not need to be elections but members can be decided by Aboriginal lore or customs. That is exactly how ATSIC became such a corrupt disaster. Determining who these representatives will be will create toxic divisions amongst Aboriginal people. Particularly when there is no process.
I could go on forever but it will be a small unrepresentative elite opining on any and every issue while our hearts break over what occurs in Aboriginal communities. The only arguments for the voice seems to be that we need to do something to address inequality and this will help. Yet it will do the opposite.
How the club can support a process where there is no democracy, no accountability and complete gerrymandering begs real questions about their competence. It is already creating huge divisions in aboriginal communities.
It makes far more sense for the club to recommend voting Labor for all Tassie members to try kill off the stadium and the 19th team. Beyond that the club must keep its thoughts to itself

 

[dusty1234!]

Few people have read the report. It is painfully repetitive and vague. In summary each state and territory will have 2x voice representatives. So ACT will have the same weighting as QLD or NSW despite representing a fraction of the people. There does not need to be elections but members can be decided by Aboriginal lore or customs. That is exactly how ATSIC became such a corrupt disaster. Determining who these representatives will be will create toxic divisions amongst Aboriginal people. Particularly when there is no process.
I could go on forever but it will be a small unrepresentative elite opining on any and every issue while our hearts break over what occurs in Aboriginal communities. The only arguments for the voice seems to be that we need to do something to address inequality and this will help. Yet it will do the opposite.
How the club can support a process where there is no democracy, no accountability and complete gerrymandering begs real questions about their competence. It is already creating huge divisions in aboriginal communities.
It makes far more sense for the club to recommend voting Labor for all Tassie members to try kill off the stadium and the 19th team. Beyond that the club must keep its thoughts to itself

I don't think it is appropriate to look at the Voice as a Labor vs Liberal contest, as I am afraid you are doing here.
By mentioning Mundine and Price, 2 highly political figures (not that their opinions should be disregarded), you have made the Voice a political arguement.

This is not divisive, in fact it will unite the nation. It has been consistently demonstrated that the vast majority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people support the voice, and I am sure that would also have been true for those who work at Richmond.

Constitutional change does not involve every specific detail of a certain policy being brought to a vote, rather a Yes or No vote on whether the Australian people agree with the proposal in principle. There is a specific reason that not every single detail about the Voice has been released.

 

[RockJobster0312]

Few people have read the report. It is painfully repetitive and vague. In summary each state and territory will have 2x voice representatives. So ACT will have the same weighting as QLD or NSW despite representing a fraction of the people. There does not need to be elections but members can be decided by Aboriginal lore or customs. That is exactly how ATSIC became such a corrupt disaster. Determining who these representatives will be will create toxic divisions amongst Aboriginal people. Particularly when there is no process.
I could go on forever but it will be a small unrepresentative elite opining on any and every issue while our hearts break over what occurs in Aboriginal communities. The only arguments for the voice seems to be that we need to do something to address inequality and this will help. Yet it will do the opposite.
How the club can support a process where there is no democracy, no accountability and complete gerrymandering begs real questions about their competence. It is already creating huge divisions in aboriginal communities.
It makes far more sense for the club to recommend voting Labor for all Tassie members to try kill off the stadium and the 19th team. Beyond that the club must keep its thoughts to itself

I don’t want to descend into a debate about the Voice itself per se; the real topic is the club coming out and supporting it.

The same arguments that you used (and are being used for those voting no) aren’t entirely without merit (although I’d argue it’s been oversold) and most commonly ATSIC. But the same structure is used across Australia for other Indigenous groups which interact across other areas legislation, seemingly with little evidence of any sort of corruption.

But the alternative (which I assume you would mean elections within the Indigenous community itself) themselves aren’t totally devoid of corruption. As an example, multiple elected local Government Councilors have been found guilty of taking massive bribes in return for voting favour ably on certain planning provisions.

Also the argument that the representatives of Indigenous communities as envisioned by the Voice to represent Indigenous Communities on its issues only on a model preferred by non-Indigenous people is disingenuous. The proposed representation model and based First Nations law and customs is how First Nations people have been doing it for millennia. Basically what is suggested is ‘advice us on your issues and advice on what is important to Indigenous Australians but do it in a Western way’.

And I think that’s another key difference. Those who aren’t in favour of the voice seemingly fixated on the group and it compilation, as opposed to the broader picture. I see it as much as an acknowledgment for the first time in our Constitution that Indigenous Australians have a unique history that spans 60,000 years. That it has a unique connection with its people, and a unique interaction with its elders. It as a unique history with country. That uniqueness will be on display throughout this weekend, and none moreso than this Saturday night.

I see the Voice more as an acknowledgment that those unique elements does translate into a unique interaction with the Constitution, laws and policies.

I think it’s that acknowledgment which the club is supporting. As is Collingwood and the Essendon football clubs. I also expect all 18 teams will outline its support in the coming days.

I did say I didn’t want to get into the details, but hopefully I brought it back to why the club is supporting it; and as I’ve said; why it should.

 

[tigerisland]

I don't think it is appropriate to look at the Voice as a Labor vs Liberal contest, as I am afraid you are doing here.
By mentioning Mundine and Price, 2 highly political figures (not that their opinions should be disregarded), you have made the Voice a political arguement.

This is not divisive, in fact it will unite the nation. It has been consistently demonstrated that the vast majority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people support the voice, and I am sure that would also have been true for those who work at Richmond.

Constitutional change does not involve every specific detail of a certain policy being brought to a vote, rather a Yes or No vote on whether the Australian people agree with the proposal in principle. There is a specific reason that not every single detail about the Voice has been released.

I mention 2 x former labor federal MPs
1 x former labor national president 1 x apolitical judge and 1x national party senator yet my argument is based on the liberal party? Bizzare.
Everyone pushing the voice is a highly political person. Linda Burney its main proponent is the federal minister for indigenous affairs.
The voice is political. Changing the nation’s constitution is political. Inferring rights to a certain race is political. And that is exactly why RFC must have nothing to do with it. The fact the AFL tells us to jump and we say how high is a farce.
All the aboriginal people I know are against the voice. I appreciate all the activists will tell you there is this vast majority of Aboriginal people who want this but I have no faith in the push polling that has been done on the voice.

 

[tigerisland]

I don’t want to descend into a debate about the Voice itself per se; the real topic is the club coming out and supporting it.

The same arguments that you used (and are being used for those voting no) aren’t entirely without merit (although I’d argue it’s been oversold) and most commonly ATSIC. But the same structure is used across Australia for other Indigenous groups which interact across other areas legislation, seemingly with little evidence of any sort of corruption.

But the alternative (which I assume you would mean elections within the Indigenous community itself) themselves aren’t totally devoid of corruption. As an example, multiple elected local Government Councilors have been found guilty of taking massive bribes in return for voting favour ably on certain planning provisions.

Also the argument that the representatives of Indigenous communities as envisioned by the Voice to represent Indigenous Communities on its issues only on a model preferred by non-Indigenous people is disingenuous. The proposed representation model and based First Nations law and customs is how First Nations people have been doing it for millennia. Basically what is suggested is ‘advice us on your issues and advice on what is important to Indigenous Australians but do it in a Western way’.

And I think that’s another key difference. Those who aren’t in favour of the voice seemingly fixated on the group and it compilation, as opposed to the broader picture. I see it as much as an acknowledgment for the first time in our Constitution that Indigenous Australians have a unique history that spans 60,000 years. That it has a unique connection with its people, and a unique interaction with its elders. It as a unique history with country. That uniqueness will be on display throughout this weekend, and none moreso than this Saturday night.

I see the Voice more as an acknowledgment that those unique elements does translate into a unique interaction with the Constitution, laws and policies.

I think it’s that acknowledgment which the club is supporting. As is Collingwood and the Essendon football clubs. I also expect all 18 teams will outline its support in the coming days.

I did say I didn’t want to get into the details, but hopefully I brought it back to why the club is supporting it; and as I’ve said; why it should.

Unfortunately there is corruption across all levels of government. Creating more government - which this does - only means more corruption.
As for the representation structure I can confidently say Aboriginal people before white man never had state boundaries where each state had 2 representatives along with 2 x Torres Strait islanders with 50/50 gender ratios and a proportion who must also be disabled. But yes you are right there was no democratic process to become a leader.

You cannot just wish away the monumental corrupt disaster that was ATSIC. The Calma Langton report makes multiple references to ATSIC and the alleged good it did!
I simply cannot understand why the club takes a position on such a divisive political issue. One that pits urban elites against the rest of Australia.

 

[RockJobster0312]

Unfortunately there is corruption across all levels of government. Creating more government - which this does - only means more corruption.
As for the representation structure I can confidently say Aboriginal people before white man never had state boundaries where each state had 2 representatives along with 2 x Torres Strait islanders with 50/50 gender ratios and a proportion who must also be disabled. But yes you are right there was no democratic process to become a leader.

You cannot just wish away the monumental corrupt disaster that was ATSIC. The Calma Langton report makes multiple references to ATSIC and the alleged good it did!
I simply cannot understand why the club takes a position on such a divisive political issue. One that pits urban elites against the rest of Australia.

As much as you can’t wish away the issues with ATSIC, you cannot assume that everything will always be the same. Learnings will no doubt be applied and changes made.

There’s been enough internal reports relating to ATSIC that the Voice should be build on only its most solid foundations.

But to the case at hand. To me it’s simple. You see this issue as purely political terms. That’s fine. But I, like many other see it as much more. Something that transcends the purely political space. Something that touches on social, moral, ethical and historical notions. A chance for more listening and less telling. Of more learning and less dictating. Of more togetherness through understanding.

Why wouldn’t the club support something like that?

 

[South of the Yarra]

Excuse the intrusion but congrats to the Tigers for taking this stand for a Yes vote. They are doing all they can for Aboriginal people and backing their players and supporters who are Aboriginal. Great work Tigers.

 

[South of the Yarra]

I am confident no one here or at the the club has ever read the Calma Langton report which our PM says spells out the details. You can download it here. Indigenous voice co-design process: final report to the Australian Government
The voice will only divide rather than unite Australia. Brave Aboriginal leaders like Jacinta Price and Warren Mundine have seen out against this divisive policy.
For all those who think this is the right call please read the proposal in full.
The club should run a million miles from this.
For all those who scream you are ill-informed or a bigot or anything else for not agreeing with this proposal read the voices of those who descent. Such as former appeals court judge Terence Coe, Labor MPs Gary John’s or Graham Richardson.
Everyone wants to better the lives of our First Nations people. The voice will not do that. It will re create the aboriginal elite that gave us the disastrous ATSIC.
Footy should bring us together, not tear us apart. Club simply must stay out of politics.

The nation is already divided, and Aboriginal people have suffered for hundreds of years due to this division. Everyone does not want better lives for Aboriginal people, most do but not all. Footy Administrators should be a model for showing young Aboriginal people (the same ones they are happy to showcase to sell the game) that they will stand with them and back them. The large majority of Aboriginal people want a voice and will vote YES. We keep hearing everyone wants better lives for Aboriginals, but nothing is working. It is getting worse. Aboriginal people have never had a voice. It is time. Great work Tigers.

 

[Siberiantiger]

The Voice is ultimately not about giving Aboriginal people representation, but about removing representation from all Australians and more besides, although no grass-roots supporters know this. Only in the highest echelons is it known.

The people ultimately responsible for pushing it are not Aboriginal. Nor are they Australians. They have no morality whatsoever and Australian politicians of whatever ilk are merely puppets. Their care for Aboriginal communities, especially remote ones, is entirely pretence.

By now you probably doubt that I fully support the Aboriginal representation at the club. I do. Absolutely. However, I know far more about what really goes on behind the scenes of politics than anyone, yes, anyone, who shall likely comment here, and supporting a Trojan horse is something I won't do, even if I cannot elaborate in any manner that most will understand and believe.

I held a number of positions in the ALP over many years. I do not endorse the Coalition or One Nation, nor anyone else. I get criticised by those on both sides of politics as I refuse to be pigeon-holed. Fascists hate me, as do Communists.

Suffice to say that totalitarian Trojan horses are made to look inviting and this is dressed up as exactly that.

The same-sex marriage plebiscite was also a Trojan horse, on the road to ultimately normalising paedophilia for the same people in the shadows of politics (on both sides).

For the record, I know far more about paedophiles than anyone likely to comment here, because I was the victim of one, as was my wife.

If anyone wishes to criticise a child sex abuse victim who was later threatened with death for infiltrating an organised paedophile network in the shadows of politics, law, healthcare, religion (including Atheism) and much else as well at the very highest levels and has lived with PTSD as an unheard whistleblower for nearly half a century, well, go ahead.

Be it on your conscience, though. Mine is totally clean.

I love the club, but I know I can live without footy because the AFL is just a circus. Bread and circuses was the old Roman way and the modern Roman-style emperors don't quit on something that works.

(This is my fourth account, each with similar names. PTSD does that to you. You quit and then you come back).

 

[tigerisland]

Excuse the intrusion but congrats to the Tigers for taking this stand for a Yes vote. They are doing all they can for Aboriginal people and backing their players and supporters who are Aboriginal. Great work Tigers.

How could you possibly know how Aboriginal players at RFC will think or vote. What a racist horrible statement. I know this is hard for city based people of the left to understand but Aboriginal people are just as capable to make decisions independently as any other Australian of any race. Aboriginal people do not just all think alike.
All this is so ugly and just highlights again that RFC must have nothing to do with the voice.

 

[tigerisland]

As much as you can’t wish away the issues with ATSIC, you cannot assume that everything will always be the same. Learnings will no doubt be applied and changes made.

There’s been enough internal reports relating to ATSIC that the Voice should be build on only its most solid foundations.

But to the case at hand. To me it’s simple. You see this issue as purely political terms. That’s fine. But I, like many other see it as much more. Something that transcends the purely political space. Something that touches on social, moral, ethical and historical notions. A chance for more listening and less telling. Of more learning and less dictating. Of more togetherness through understanding.

Why wouldn’t the club support something like that?

So your argument is now simply an emotional appeal. Because when you review tangible outcomes you know the voice is a disaster. I trust the opinion of Jacinta price who represents one of the highest aboriginal electorates in the country and has been on the front lines of this issue for 30 plus years over Benny Gale or Gill.
Politics goes to the heart of all the emotional issues you raise. The voice is political. There is no getting around it and therefore RFC must shut its mouth on this issue.

 

[South of the Yarra]

How could you possibly know how Aboriginal players at RFC will think or vote. What a racist horrible statement. I know this is hard for city based people of the left to understand but Aboriginal people are just as capable to make decisions independently as any other Australian of any race. Aboriginal people do not just all think alike.
All this is so ugly and just highlights again that RFC must have nothing to do with the voice.

Firstly I appreciate your compliment about my ability to make decisions for myself. Secondly, I am really not sure you understand what being racist is. Thirdly, whilst I value your point about Aboriginal people thinking for themselves you seem to have very little understanding of the mob and clan system where a council of elders or a significant elder would give advice to the community and the rest would most likely follow out of respect for their wisdom. If Aunty Miriam gives the nod at Daly all will follow, if old lady Wilson says yes at Peppi, yes it will be. The elders I meet with regularly represent around 50,000 people and I can tell you the majority of that 50’000 will all be voting YES. The reason I know how the Aboriginal players are thinking is that I know for a fact the Richmond Football Club consulted them during the process.
Fourthly sorry to disappoint you but I am not a city based person of the left. I am a proud outback Aboriginal man (Stolen Generation), you know, one of the ones who never saw his family again so I do have a vested interest in this. I want what is best for Aboriginal people.

 

[RockJobster0312]

So your argument is now simply an emotional appeal. Because when you review tangible outcomes you know the voice is a disaster. I trust the opinion of Jacinta price who represents one of the highest aboriginal electorates in the country and has been on the front lines of this issue for 30 plus years over Benny Gale or Gill.
Politics goes to the heart of all the emotional issues you raise. The voice is political. There is no getting around it and therefore RFC must shut its mouth on this issue.

My argument has always been that the club has done it to show its support for First Nations players both past and present that have walked the halls of the football club. You may call it an emotional appeal if you’d like. I call it doing what’s right for the people who have made the football club what it is. To stand with them in their time of need.

This discussion has always been about why the club has publically supported the Voice. My personal view is that the Voice could beget a new era of unity and prosperity for First Nations people. That is the hope. I don’t think it will be disaster at all. If not now, when? Is an ingrained inequality just something we - and especially First Nations people - should just accept?

You can trust whomever opinion you like. I would note that multiple aboriginal elders with equally - if not more - experience have called out Jacinta Price. I would suggest you read the likes of Lesley Turner (and similarly the entire Central Land Council) or Aunty Ruth Dunn. There are many many others. Regardless, I’ve yet to see Gil or Benny Gale put out anything that says why you should vote yes. Just that they support it. Considering that the AFL and the associated clubs would be on of - if not the - biggest employers of First Nations people in Australia; how can they not take a stance.

And lastly, strongly disagree that politics goes to the heart of everything. Politics is undoubtedly part of it. No one will deny it. But it isn’t the only thing. You can’t bring social dynamics back to politics. You can’t bring morality back to politics. You cannot bring history back to politics. You can bring culture or story sharing back to politics. It’s more than that and it directly affect multiple current employees and past players of the club. And that is why the RFC didn’t and shouldn’t shut its mouth on the issue.

 

[dusty1234!]

I mention 2 x former labor federal MPs
1 x former labor national president 1 x apolitical judge and 1x national party senator yet my argument is based on the liberal party? Bizzare.
Everyone pushing the voice is a highly political person. Linda Burney its main proponent is the federal minister for indigenous affairs.
The voice is political. Changing the nation’s constitution is political. Inferring rights to a certain race is political. And that is exactly why RFC must have nothing to do with it. The fact the AFL tells us to jump and we say how high is a farce.
All the aboriginal people I know are against the voice. I appreciate all the activists will tell you there is this vast majority of Aboriginal people who want this but I have no faith in the push polling that has been done on the voice.

Come on mate, we know you are not that naive.
Warren Mundine is a former Liberal candidate, and nothing close to a Labor man.

How on earth is it "inferring rights" to a certain race? We are giving ATI people the opportunity to make representations on issues that directly affect them. Mind you, these are the same people who had all of their rights stolen, and their families ripped apart. Surely we can all agree it is high time that we take meaningful steps towards reconciliation. It is a national embarrasment, that we do better at sending our First Nations brothers and sisters to jail, than help them finish high school.

"All the aboriginal people I know are against the voice." I am sad to say that that is an extremley disengeous comment. This is a throwaway line that anyone can use, and it doesn't make it any more valid. It is about the same as 'I'm not racist but...'


"I appreciate all the activists will tell you there is this vast majority of Aboriginal people who want this but I have no faith in the push polling that has been done on the voice." It isn't activists telling us this, and it is ok if you don't trust the polls. Simply trust all the people who have participated in the process of the Uluru Statement from the Heart, who support it, and listen to all the elders who have publically called for the Voice.

Again, I am afraid and sad that you see this is a political contest. The voice is not a voice for Labor MPs, for Liberal MPs, Green MPs or 'activists,' it is a voice for all Australians, regardless of political persuasion to get behind.