06-02-2005, 07:05 AM
Hi,
I don't think it's necessary to read every line of the constitution, reading a summary of what it's all about would be enough in my mind. But voting without having the slightest idea what it's about (or even worse, having wrong ideas about it) is...just wrong.
-Kylearan
Bob,Jun 1 2005, 03:09 PM Wrote:I'd be more frightened if they'd voted for the constitution without knowing what it said.Agreed, and I guess there had been lots of people doing just that as well, only there were no polls showing it.
I don't think it's necessary to read every line of the constitution, reading a summary of what it's all about would be enough in my mind. But voting without having the slightest idea what it's about (or even worse, having wrong ideas about it) is...just wrong.
Quote:If you don't know what the change your being asked to make is it's better to keep the status quo, the change can always be reintroduced later.Here I have to disagree. There is no status quo - the status quo has been destroyed last year, when 10 new nations joined the club.
Quote:If you don't like Chirac and his politics and he tells you to vote 'yes' to some sort of sweeping change, are you going to vote for it?I don't say everyone has to vote "yes" to the constitution; I'm only frustrated about people having wrong reasons to do so. The constitution wasn't created by Chirac alone, and will affect not only France but Europe as a whole, so yes, if I don't like Chirac and his politics and he tells me to vote "yes" to some sweeping change, I might vote for it nonetheless.
-Kylearan
There are two kinds of fools. One says, "This is old, and therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore better." - John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider