Nothing can justify hereditary succession beyond sentiment and tradition. As Thomas Paine said, the idea of hereditary rulers is as absurd as the idea of hereditary judges or hereditary mathematicians.

Some traditions pass their "use by" date, and that time has come for constitutional monarchy in Australia. As an independent nation we deserve to have a titular Head of State, democratically chosen, who is one of us, at the apex of our federal parliamentary democracy.

...Yes but Fred S, who could argue that a candidate outside the hereditary circle of Royalty would offer any advantage at all. What you suggest is a Gillard an Abbott a Howard etc., you fill in the blanks with whatever conceited leader of your choice! Australia needs more stability not less; it's why change is rejected!

Just about anyone who is Australian and outside the "hereditary circle" would be better. For example, Zelman Cowen, William Deane, the current Governor-General. All we need do is arrange for a more democratic way of selecting the Governor-General, while deleting reference to the monarchy, and retain the Governor-General as Head of State, with the same role and powers as now.

<<Nothing can justify hereditary succession beyond sentiment and tradition.>>

True, Fred, but sentiment and tradition (in moderation) are good things to have.

<<the idea of hereditary rulers is as absurd>>

Of course, but has anyone proposed that Will and Kate be ruling over us? Surely they will only be a symbol.
Moreover, their benign presence, holding that space, will act as a stop-gap, immunising us against some real ruler trying to control our lives.

<<As an independent nation we deserve to have a titular Head of State, democratically chosen, who is one of us, at the apex of our federal parliamentary democracy.>>

'Nation': If anything is out-dated, isn't the concept of "nation" first in line to go?

'Deserve': This word commonly refers either to a prize or to a punishment. As there is no advantage, I must assume that's intended as punishment (for being a naughty nation?).

Apex of 'democracy': Since our democracy is non-existent, perhaps that's why we deserve to be punished with a local stick rather than a remote feather?

As the father of a teenage daughter the idea that this society still has any "values" at all is laughable, this article is fine work if the target audience is over 40, to the "youth" it means nothing.
This isn't just a cranky generational thesis either, there is no longer any public example of virtue I can give to my child to dissuade her from taking semi nude photos of herself and posting them online, I can yell, I can punish but the words are hollow when there's no social stigma to wield against such behaviour.(and yes our young lady was a girl guide from the age of seven until last year)
I got a tweet the other day from someone in the U.S linking to an article on this very issue, the writer said words to the effect that in railing against the current, degenerate, narcissistic memes "We're pulling up a whore's underwear after she's done her business in the street and telling ourselves we're safeguarding public morals".

Jay of Melbourne, we've heard this 'good old days' stuff all before.

We heard it about the degenerate black people wanting to remove discrimination and segregation (or even slavery). Heard it from the degenerate homosexuals wanting to be left alone by the law. From the sickos wanting interracial marriage and now even the dirty gays wanting to marry!

Yours is just a cranky generational thesis; the only thing constant in life is change, some good, some bad.