Brian Ross wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2023 at 3:14pm:


My suggested solution is for you to go fix it

Boris wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2023 at 2:18pm:


I know, right? It's secret men's and women's business. You would have seen the injuries at Alice Springs Hospital, Matty.

They're forced to eat the meat of their siblings, typically filleted with an axe. They feast on the whole body - apart from their dingos, who get the entrails. Then they're brutally raped and tortured.

They say it builds resilience.

Is that right, Aquascoot?

Boris wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2023 at 1:52pm:


I just explained in the previous post why it isn't. Are you thick?....

Quote:


Even that isn't 'personal responsibility' if - as you contend - it's ritual behaviour carried over from the stone age.

Quote:



Refuted above;  ritual systems, and economic systems, are beyond the reach of 'personal responsibility'.

The Voice enshrined in the constitution ensures a government cannot easily dismantle the voice as it could in a preamble.

The is nothing in the Voice that change lives on non-indigenous people, the parliament maintains control.

What the voice does is give greater voice for Aboriginals to have a say in what matters to them.

There is no doubt that are big social issues in remote communities, as funding often goes awry, where poverty remains the core of the problem. There was work for the dole programs happening, similar to the Green Corps that saw people employed, and was having a positive effect on reducing drunken behaviour, then the Abbott government dismantled those work programs, cheaper have people do nothing.

Without self-determination there is no motivation to change and fix the social issues, issues that only the Aboriginal people can fix themselves as Governments and NGO's have proven they are unable to fix the social issues that poverty brings.

Give them the opportunity and they will be motivated to fix the drunken depravity and socials issues with young people, a no vote is simply deny opportunity to maintain the status quo of NGO's and the mining lobby..

And to add....Aboriginals have ownership of vast tracks of land but often have no say when miners want their hands on the valuable resources they may contain, which is the the fundamental basics of the No campaign.

The idea that a Voice is discriminates against non-indigenous folk, and still no evidence on how this is so, is a furphy, it's a look over here distraction to hide the real reason, to deny Aboriginal people real ownership..

The Greens senator Lidia Thorpe has vowed not to support the Indigenous voice to parliament unless she is “satisfied that First Nations sovereignty is not ceded”.

The Albanese government and constitutional experts reject the suggestion that entrenching the voice in the constitution would have any impact on sovereignty.

We spoke to experts who explained why the two questions are entirely separate.

What is sovereignty?
Sovereignty is supreme power or authority over a body politic.

Professor Tom Calma AO receives the 2023 Senior Australian of the Year award during the 2023 Australian of the Year Awards. He is an Indigenous Australian man with short white hair and is wearing a dark suit, white shirt and black-and-white graphic patterned tie
Senior Australian of the year Tom Calma ‘disappointed’ Lidia Thorpe may oppose voice
Read more
The constitutional law expert and deputy vice chancellor of University of New South Wales, George Williams, noted that “people speak about sovereignty in different ways – for many it’s as much a moral or political concept as it is legal”.

Who has sovereignty in Australia?
The crown, the commonwealth of Australia, the states and territories.

According to legal advice by the barrister Bret Walker in 2011, cited by the joint select committee on constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, “the basis of settlement of Australia is and always has been, ultimately, the exertion of force by and on behalf of the British arrivals”.

The colonies federated in 1901, and in 1967 a referendum gave the commonwealth authority over Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people but, since no treaty was made with Indigenous people, sovereignty was never ceded....https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jan/26/will-indigenous-voice-to-parliament-impact-first-nations-sovereignty-explainer

Pedro Curevo wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2023 at 8:08pm:

There is no communal Aboriginal ownership of any land. Individual ownership is not an Aboriginal concept.
Land rights and ownership are separate things.

Aborigines are citizens like everyone else. For them to have a say over laws affecting everyone is racist. Most aborigines have more Anglo Celtic blood in them than the millions of Asian and European immigrants over the past 70 years who have absolutely nothing to do with whatever the Aborigines are pissed off about.

In a way this is the diversity ideology's collapse under the weight of it's own incoherence. It makes no sense for a 1/8th Aborigine to have special political power over a second generation European or Asian immigrant. Or a first generation one, for that matter.

It is a deeply sinister, contradictory, incoherent proposal.