The Forum > General Discussion > re-balance
re-balance
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Page 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
-
- All
The National Forum | Donate | Your Account | On Line Opinion | Forum | Blogs | Polling | About |
Syndicate RSS/XML |
|
About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy |
What you appear to have omitted, though, is any rebuttal, refutation or contradiction of any of the points that you have most diligently gathered together in one place.
When you do, maybe you could also elaborate on this latest statement of yours:
>>Australia's federal and state constitutions provide explicitly for the removal of all women members and the prohibition on all women exercising a vote at elections by reason of their gender, not for the removal of fat people, anybody over a certain age, manic-depressives, stamp-collectors, pawpaw-growers or closet Trekkies.<<
You use the word "explicitly". Which to most people means that it is stated, positively and unequivocally, for all to see and understand.
I wonder if you would be so kind as to point to the relevant clauses? Because in my copy of the Commonwealth Constitution, there is absolutely no mention of "women", at all. I did also take a look at the online versions of the State constitutions - where they assist with a search engine - and couldn't find any references there either.
It isn't that I disbelieve you, just that I haven't been able to uncover the relevant clauses myself. You clearly have, so I'd simply like to take a look at them.
>>If women and men obtain equal rights all demographics comprised of women and men obtain equal rights<<
Here's a point on which we clearly agree. What I haven't yet been able to understand is where you see the inequality.