五區總辭 wiki wiki

五區總辭 wiki wiki
五區總辭 wiki wiki

快啲 ! 快啲 ! 五區總辭
各位觀眾五條煙 ! !
轉載 :
1.為何立法會五區總辭，會變成公投2012雙普選？

當每區有一位 立法會議員辭職後，5個 空缺席位會進行補選，而補選是採用, 單議席單票制 (多數決制，即多票者勝)。再由泛民設定一個議題，即是否要 2012雙普選，當選民投票予泛民參選者，即支持 2012 雙普選，變相公投。

如是者，當泛民五區議員 順利再次當選，即代表 2012 雙普選 具有相當的民意基礎。對特區政府和 中央政府 會造成極大的壓力，有壓力, 同時在國際間, 一定能夠惹來廣泛的關注。而具體做法, 則仍由泛民各政黨商討中，會盡快向公眾交代。

2. 萬一補選有泛民議員不幸落選，豈不賠了夫人又折兵？

是否爭取 2012雙普選，由選民決定，不管結果如何，我們都尊重選民的抉擇。「香港的前途如何，由港人自決」，這就是是次公投的意義和精神。

為人民服務的立法會議員，是否應該為了戀棧議席, 而連些微風險都不敢承擔？相信大家心中有數。因此不存在「機關算盡地 計算公投結果」的必要。


3. 為何必須以五區總辭的方式 來製造公投？沒有其他方法嗎？

基本法雖然沒有規定不可以公投，但現時亦不存在公投機制。

如要創造該機制，需要由立法會通過法案，但是立法會由保皇派和 親中勢力盤踞。即使泛民主派 在地方直選佔大多數，卻就是整個議會的少數 (23/60)。而且議員提出的個人議案 (假設是 創造公投機制 )，贊成票就必須超過一半，另外還要分組點票，即直選和 功能組別各過半數才獲通過。

功能組別是小圈子選舉，大多港人都無投票權。而且當中有一半界別的選票並非以個人為單位，而是以企業、工會為單位，當中絕大部份都是親建制派的。所以民主派要在功能組別拿一半的議席是不可能的，在面對荒唐的分組點票機制，更是不可能創造公投機制的。

因此必須以五區總辭的方法來製造公投機會，而又最具認受性、代表性。

reference :

長毛《向左望》第五集(1)：長毛五區總辭答問大會
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmBA5PNzDw8

Quote :
Ultimate Concern - Tillich in Dialogue by D. Mackenzie Brown

Dr. Tillich: In your question I think two problems are combined. One is the general idea of ultimate concern. I have sometimes explained it successfully, to people who are shocked by the term or not readily able to comprehend it, as taking something with ultimate seriousness, unconditional seriousness. That is a useful translation. It is not as good as "concern," but to "take seriously" is a kind of concern. And the term is in some cases easier than the word "concern."

If people tell you, "I have no ultimate concern," which all of you have probably heard, then ask them, "Is there really nothing at all that you take with unconditional seriousness? What, for instance, would you be ready to suffer or even die for?"

Then you will discover that even the cynic takes his cynicism with ultimate seriousness, not to speak of the others, who may be naturalists, materialists, Communists, or whatever. They certainly take something with ultimate seriousness.

That deals with one question. The other problem is that of being grasped. When you find what it is that a person takes so seriously, then and there you can say, "He is grasped by it." This means that, as his life has developed, this seriousness was not produced by active, reflective, voluntary processes, but came to him, perhaps very early, and never left him.

Take the scientist. If he has matured in the scientific tradition, he is willing to give up every particular of his scientific findings (they are all preliminary, never final), but he will never give up the scientific attitude, even if a tyrant should demand it of him. Or if he were weak enough to give it up, he would do it with a bad conscience.

And every Communist youth who takes communism seriously would be the same. That is how we are grasped. We cannot produce it, cannot say, "I will make this or that a matter of my ultimate concern." It has already grasped us when we begin to reflect on it.

Now if it comes to religion proper, or religion in the narrower sense, there are two ways in which this grasping happens. The one way is exactly the same way as with the scientist or Communist, or the nationalist, or the American liberal humanist: they have grown up in it. It has meaning for them. They would fight for it. They wouldn’t give it up.

On the other hand, it sometimes happens that some other form of ultimate concern, different from what we grew up in, comes to us from outside. This is the missionary situation, or the situation we usually call conversion. And there are less dramatic ways.

Suddenly, in a lecture or in a talk with a friend, something clicks with us; before that it was meaningless. We had heard it before, we perhaps understood it to a certain extent, but it failed to click — and then suddenly it does. This is a more intellectual type of conversion experience, but it can have great consequences in the long run.

http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=538&C=598