Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Sports
»
Is it true about SUPKEM and DSTV
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,823 Location: Nairobi
|
I liked what the professor said,you are currently living in a grass thatched house with an outside toilet (10 meters from your door post), you pay a contractor to build you a palace in muthaiga or runda, the dude decides to put a pit latrine INSIDE your palace after instructing him not to do so. then he shamelessly says he won't he cannot remove the cess pit now that since you are in too much in a hurry and you have already spent so much money - you should just move into the house (ignore the cess pit right inside there since you had it before in the old thatched house). I mean who paid for the house? Is it akina RAO or KIBs or any MPs? do they contribute taxes? They did not pay for the house ...we the tax payers did!!! So unless they are new tax payers they should stop saying it is too expensive - we pay them we are their employers!! All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 6/24/2008 Posts: 238
|
Wendz, besides the fact that it is hard and quite expensive to amend the contentious parts of the draft, it also depends on how serious we take the issue to be. Even that 90% good.. blah blah blah.. depends on importance we attach to the issues.
Imagine if the constitution was all good except for a clause saying the president's term shall not be limited- that one can be President so long as he is elected. I can almost bet this would be very contentious because of the importance we attach to our politics, and we will be out saying it is only 10% good. Rallying people to oppose it will be easy. It would be a matter of life and death!
Many people have decided that the issues of kadhi's courts (state's equal treatment of religions)and abortion are not as serious as would say the issue of unlimited term of the president. They can live with it and change it later. It is within their right. Equally others cannot vote yes without thinking they are entrenching abortion-on-demand and inequality of religion in the most important law of the land.
We have choices, don't we!
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 6/26/2008 Posts: 319
|
For me, it remains a NO.
Willy Koech put it very well on last night's Loius show on K24. The good things may be 90%, but the bad things in this constitution are quite glaring and sober thinking Kenyans should not follow politicians blindly (sorry), but should debate the negative articles, not just be boxed into Kadhi's and abortion clauses, there are more issues and they are serious!
Let us all register as voters, vote this draft out and shelf it. Come 2012, the same euphoria of 2002, let us eliminate at least 75% of the current house, and then with a new leadership, do a proper constitution for all Kenyans.
So go out and register as a voter. Knock off the current paper and keep ur kura intact till 2012. That is the more significant change we can make.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,823 Location: Nairobi
|
@Sigiriri, I listened to him too - quite revealing. But saying the Kadhi's and Abortion clauses are minor was not proper. i however applaud his question of why are people taking politicians' word for it? when 80% of Kenyans have not read the constitution 64% will vote YES for it. All major Christian leaders (ACK + CATHOLICS + NCCK + Evangelicals e.t.c.) cannot be wrong after going for retreats to ensure that they tackle the issues at hand. It is indeed suspect for a government or the state to push for this document. Thea is no need to get a new constitution if there are glaring errors in it - when you vote YES, you are not saying i wish to support Raila or Kibs on this, you are saying I am binding my children and my lineage to be governed by this document ad infinitum. lets not dwell on the good things (they are ours) lets look at the potential problems we may be subjecting our descendants to. All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/23/2008 Posts: 3,017
|
Sigiriri wrote:For me, it remains a NO.
Willy Koech put it very well on last night's Loius show on K24. The good things may be 90%, but the bad things in this constitution are quite glaring and sober thinking Kenyans should not follow politicians blindly (sorry), but should debate the negative articles, not just be boxed into Kadhi's and abortion clauses, there are more issues and they are serious!
Let us all register as voters, vote this draft out and shelf it. Come 2012, the same euphoria of 2002, let us eliminate at least 75% of the current house, and then with a new leadership, do a proper constitution for all Kenyans.
So go out and register as a voter. Knock off the current paper and keep ur kura intact till 2012. That is the more significant change we can make. @ Sigiriri, seriously what are you smoking. Please read what you wrote here again. You must be one of those Kenyans benefiting from the tilted playing field that the current constitution has given a few well connected individuals and denied many. 90% good is definitely a good return from anything, how can you say 90% is good then still reject it on the basis of the mythical 10% thats bad. "The purpose of bureaucracy is to compensate for incompetence and lack of discipline." James Collins
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/19/2008 Posts: 4,268
|
@masukuma
Tell me, we took this document to the parliament, when the PSC had generally agreed on most of the items except two or three items. What did we see in parliament? 150 more amendments to suit personal and political interests came up..... giving these politicians a chance to have this document back to mutilate it will be a gross mistake..... and the fact that ODM and PNU or PDM whatever it is still see each other as rivals, then the person to benefit will be the common man and that is what this constitution is doing.... if you think we can amend it now, what makes you think we cant amend it later? its not like its un-amendable?
Guys the issues that are contentious are things we can work on.... we cant throw away a whole 90% good constitution for 10%.
Those saying that we are following the politicians blindly simply because we are voting yes are mistaken. we have read the constitution and it is good... and even the nay sayers know it is good and only two issues are contentious that shouldnt really be holding us back! and the yes sayers acknowledge that there are those two contentious issues but giving the chance to have them rectified will be a nightmare coz these politicians will take advantage and change things to suit their personal interests.... thats the main reason i cant vote NO to this constitution.....
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,823 Location: Nairobi
|
has anyone read Brewer's post? Quote:Imagine if the constitution was all good except for a clause saying the president's term shall not be limited- that one can be President so long as he is elected. I can almost bet this would be very contentious because of the importance we attach to our politics, and we will be out saying it is only 10% good. Rallying people to oppose it will be easy. It would be a matter of life and death! this is to say that sometimes 99.9% is not good enough if the 0.1% is a very important to the people. some clafication, the PCS had agreed on some matters but the COE changed some back (substituting ORs with ANDs). The PSC represented parliament but is not parliament. Quote:if you think we can amend it now, what makes you think we cant amend it later? its not like its un-amendable Any amendments to provisions in the bill of rights (article 255 (1,2) article 257) need a referendum to ratify them over and above the 1 million votes to get the process moving via county assemblies to parliament. Quote: 255. (1) A proposed amendment to this Constitution shall be enacted in accordance with Article 256 or 257, and approved in accordance with clause (2) by a referendum, if the amendment relates to any of the following matters–– (a) the supremacy of this Constitution; ... (e) the Bill of Rights; .... (j) the provisions of this Chapter.
(2) A proposed amendment is approved by a referendum under clause (1) if–– (a) at least twenty per cent of the registered voters in each of at least half of the counties vote in the referendum; and (b) the amendment is supported by a simple majority of the citizens voting in the referendum.
For Kadhi's courts we can do that via county assemblies then parliament. All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/19/2008 Posts: 4,268
|
Any amendments to provisions in the bill of rights (article 255 (1,2) article 257) need a referendum to ratify them over and above the 1 million votes to get the process moving via county assemblies to parliament.
@ masukuma
and you dont think this can be done?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 11/19/2008 Posts: 1,267
|
If we want a new Constitution .... we better pass the one on the table and ammend anything we do not want thereafter.....there are so many goodies in the draft we cannot afford to lose....If we put this draft back to politicians especially Mpigs to agree on ammendment we will be losing track.....Because its very simple ...not rocket science ... THEY WILL NOT .. NEVER AGREE....so why not take the opportunity at hand to accept what they have agreed on and marshall 1 million votes to make the necessary ammendments? Are we ready to wait for another 20 years of being taken in circle? Churches, with all the registers of members should be the last to see an impossibility of gathering 1M voters. Isaiah 65:17-Look! I am creating new heavens and a new earth, and no one will even think about the old ones anymore
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 10/29/2008 Posts: 1,566
|
Fundaah wrote:If we want a new Constitution .... we better pass the one on the table and ammend anything we do not want thereafter.....there are so many goodies in the draft we cannot afford to lose....If we put this draft back to politicians especially Mpigs to agree on ammendment we will be losing track.....Because its very simple ...not rocket science ... THEY WILL NOT .. NEVER AGREE....so why not take the opportunity at hand to accept what they have agreed on and marshall 1 million votes to make the necessary ammendments?
Are we ready to wait for another 20 years of being taken in circle?
Churches, with all the registers of members should be the last to see an impossibility of gathering 1M voters. It is far easier and cheaper to fix the sticking issues now rather than post referundum. And while at it, who said the only option on the table is getting parliament to amend the contents of the draft. I may also ask what's so difficult in presenting the contentious issues as seperate questions to the people of Kenya to decide? And for heavens sake, the COE, the mother act, and even the amendment to section 47 of the constitution to smooth the process of bringing forth this draft was all done by the current Parliament. I therefore dont get it when we are now adopting an hollier than thou attitude and demonising the MPs who brought us this far. "Msitukane wakunga, na hali uzazi ungaliko". Isuni yilu yi maa me muyo - ni Mbisuu
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Sports
»
Is it true about SUPKEM and DSTV
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|