While I personally believe that a referendum on this topic would be a waste of public money, and ultimately solve nothing (bigots will stay bigoted, whatever anyone else says: that's what they do), surely a cry to "ban the referendum" is equally shortsighted and stupid?

It simply gives the bigots one more thing to bleat about.

There are no "flames" to fan, not even a smouldering wick on a candle of prejudice or a single twinkling coal in the ashes of the Australian nation.
These "bigots" are just approaching anti Racism in a different way, it's simply non Feminist, non New Left critique, you can't even call it right wing.
Neither side is talking about the real problems with mass third world immigration and both sides work to suppress both honest criticism and radical viewpoints.
It's well known that "Anti Racists" as well as the so called patriots groups feed information to ASIO and the Federal Police, some of them such as Sherman Burgess and Ralph Cerminara are so dopey they can't keep their mouths shut about their links with the state.

How about a referendum on whether our country should be beholden to international law?

There is a massive glaring flaw with your article's basic argument: that is, that we are somehow constrained by International Law as if it were sacrosanct. You don't seem to accept the fact that a country can choose to be governed by it or not. Of course a country may subject to trade embargoes or worse possible invasion if it doesn't follow these laws-- but at the end of the day it is the countries choice. Specifically, regarding the Burqa I don't think any country of consequence (ie: militarily powerful and economically import countries) would actually do anything besides token words of disapproval against a first world country that did ban it.

I really don't understand how you can hold the belief that a referendum cannot be the ultimate source and final word on what should or should not be our own law.

(By-the-way: personally I don't care either way about a ban on the Burqa, its just a piece of clothing. But, I really do care when foreigners (ie: UN) think they can start telling me what my Laws should be without giving me the right to agree to and/or influence change about those laws.)

Even though not all moslems believe the burqua must be worn that is not
the point. Consider why it is worn.
It is worn because the men do not want other men to see their wives.
It is part of the paranoid attitude to women and something called honor.
As they themselves feel they cannot control their own sexual attitudes
to other women, they assume every other man is the same.
In our societies we men do not become overwhelmed by sight of a little bit of ankle.

Or perhaps we could ban bikinis? Nude bathing? Or even Pauline Hanson?

If she really wanted to do something sensible for a change, perhaps she should call for a ban on preferential voting, and have the present system replaced with proportional representation. i.e., the truly reflected will of the people?

And given primary votes would then be the only ones counted, had the recent election been decided by the fairer system, we could have seen the LNP returned with a workable majority?

The best we can hope for now, is a hung parliament and the Government needed the assistance of the minor parties, to get their legislation through!

Fortunately, none of them will be O.N.
Or Pauline, who would look nice in a burqa, topping a weensy teensy yellow polka dot bikini; or something out of, I dream of Genie!

At least a Genie can be put back in her bottle, even a five thousand year old one! Oh my itchy nose!

Unfortunately there's just no way to hide that strident whine/or that please explain that tells us a really dumb person has no choice but to come up with some really dumb ideas.
The burqa is not the problem! Racism or even reverse racism is!

The recent Q'ld election result could've been, because the majority
of voters probably thought the LNP would've been returned and therefore safe to vote labor as a protest to privatization; and or, a PM willing to confer a knighthood on a royal.

I hope it's just a really dumb decision and not a case of extreme, born to rule arrogance?

In which case Pauline would be in good company?
Rhrosty.

The amount of swing out weighs your first past the poll vote.