It was I who said follow your heart and I don't apologise. When you have listened to all the arguments, considered all the facts and the endless exhortations, you can only look to what is best in yourself, least selfish or narrow minded and vote with what your conscience tells you is better for all. What on earth is wrong with that?
I love the lofty sentiment above. But I don't think that necessarily equates to voting from your heart. My heart may well short circuit fact checking and reasoning. And many are heartless and without conscience.
Couldn't agree more Posy - bite the bullet and go with your gut feeling. My daughter had been saying she couldn't decide so wasn't going to vote but she's realised that she actually needs to stop dithering and get on with it even if she goes into that voting booth still not knowing where she's going to put the cross.
It's not like there are about 10 options, it's yes, or no. I'm sorry, it doesn't take a MENSA IQ to do a bit of research to make a decision, yes or no.
A non vote is just lazy and a slap in the face for those around the world who WANT a vote. Think N. Korea, China and don't forget the countries where only men can vote.
@Hostafan, referendums can be a stupid waste of time IMHO, and also are easy to rig. I'm glad that for once every vote counts. But if this is such an important issue, like it is purported to be, why even hand it over to the ill informed general public? I'd rather 'proper' democracy at home, and experts make that decision.
I did vote in the last referendum for a slight improvement in the voting system. But that felt more pertinent. (42% of those registered, voted.) The question should have read something like: "Should we replace the first past the post system with something fairer?".
I once used to feel people should vote, but not voting or spoiling your ballet (none of the above) also signifies you don't want to legitimise the existing corrupt system.
It's not through lack of caring. It's not lazy. And I resent your emotive remarks about universal suffrage.
To default to the status quo is an interesting take and food for thought.
Posts
It was I who said follow your heart and I don't apologise. When you have listened to all the arguments, considered all the facts and the endless exhortations, you can only look to what is best in yourself, least selfish or narrow minded and vote with what your conscience tells you is better for all. What on earth is wrong with that?
I love the lofty sentiment above. But I don't think that necessarily equates to voting from your heart. My heart may well short circuit fact checking and reasoning. And many are heartless and without conscience.
Couldn't agree more Posy - bite the bullet and go with your gut feeling. My daughter had been saying she couldn't decide so wasn't going to vote but she's realised that she actually needs to stop dithering and get on with it even if she goes into that voting booth still not knowing where she's going to put the cross.
Nout wrong with dithering. Suggest to her that she stay at home.
Last edited: 16 June 2016 08:16:46
Nope - shan't
It's not like there are about 10 options, it's yes, or no. I'm sorry, it doesn't take a MENSA IQ to do a bit of research to make a decision, yes or no.
A non vote is just lazy and a slap in the face for those around the world who WANT a vote. Think N. Korea, China and don't forget the countries where only men can vote.
If people are dithering, they should vote to stay as exit is only about uncertainty and we at least know the status quo.
@Hostafan, referendums can be a stupid waste of time IMHO, and also are easy to rig. I'm glad that for once every vote counts. But if this is such an important issue, like it is purported to be, why even hand it over to the ill informed general public? I'd rather 'proper' democracy at home, and experts make that decision.
I did vote in the last referendum for a slight improvement in the voting system. But that felt more pertinent. (42% of those registered, voted.) The question should have read something like: "Should we replace the first past the post system with something fairer?".
I once used to feel people should vote, but not voting or spoiling your ballet (none of the above) also signifies you don't want to legitimise the existing corrupt system.
It's not through lack of caring. It's not lazy. And I resent your emotive remarks about universal suffrage.
To default to the status quo is an interesting take and food for thought.
Last edited: 16 June 2016 10:06:14
"It's not through lack of caring. It's not lazy."
For some at least
Using your hard won right to vote is the only way to change the "existing corrupt system".