Dear Is Mise,

«Simple, an Australian is a citizen of Australia.»

What about kangaroos, qualas, dingos, emus and galahs? Are they not Australian? Are they not for example even more Australian than human children born to Australian parents and who have never set foot in Australia?

So who decides whether one is a citizen of Australia? Australian humans, right? That's called a circular definition.

---

Dear Jay,

«Well you're a Rabid Lefty & it shows.»

Possibly, time will tell as I don't know Ilmessaggio well enough yet.
Yet I am not a Lefty and consider his/hers a serious, difficult and contentious question.
Accusing someone of being a Lefty can be used to lazily evade addressing a difficult question.

«Would you agree to a whole bunch of Yanks becoming members of our Parliament?»

That could not happen unless a significant number of Australians were to vote to be represented by these Yanks.
In that hypothetical scenario, who are you to override their choice?

---

Dear Bazz,

«It should also ban persons who belong to political groups or religions who advocate overthrowing parliamentary government.»

The example you provided (Islam), is a backward negative one - but what will happen once, inevitably, the majority of the Australian people will grow out of this archaic concept of "government"? If you are going to prevent a peaceful transition by the people, then you inadvertently encourage a violent one.

My maternal Irish Grandmother came out over a century ago and on the bridal trail. My maternal grandfather was born in Tasmania and through him I can trace my Australasian ancestry back to the second fleet and through his maternal ancestry, back about 65,000 years?

That said, I've known foreigners with more heartfelt love for this country than many born here!

And just accepting they have a superior birthright that they just never earned or even deserve? Given how easily they'll put a few dollars more ahead of patriotism!

Simply put, you don't have to be born here to be willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for her!

It's a bit rich for folks not able to commit completely, even though born here, bitching because a representative whose politics is/was the real problem, wasn't born here!

There was a mass exodus a few years back from NZ, with the IQ improved on both sides of the ditch as the first consequence.

Now the opposite seems to be happening, with reversed results.

One remembers a few local yokels banging on about how many kiwis had taken up residence on the gold coast in a single year. When J.B.P., abolished death duties.

The following year around 3500 NZ'ers had arrived and taken up permanent residence and bought or started various small business ventures, which on average employed at least three full time Aussies!

So instead of coming here and taking our jobs, they came here risking their shirts and creating work for us rather than taking our jobs!

At the end of the day, if you don't want to be represented by a foreigner, vote for a national, even if we seem to be scraping the bottom of a very large barrel, with respect to native born Aussies willing to serve? Abusive drunks, bankrupts and one or two who'd not look too out of place, wearing brown shirts and jackboots?

Ain't that the (please explain) plane truth? Know what I mean? nudge, nudge, wink.

A nod's as good as a wink to a blind horse.
Alan B.

The reference to 'foreign power' in the section of the Constitution is also Australia asserting its sovereignty, jurisdiction and so on, which is an expected and necessary thing to do diplomatically.

That the desire should also be expressed and confirmed in nominations for the highest positions of trust and responsibility in Australia is quite reasonable and expected too.

It is an intriguing thought that there are some here, mainly special pleading for 'their' side (which is foolish in itself), who might not see anything wrong or unusual in the possibility of someone being a member of parliament in Australia as well as in their 'home' (dual nationality) country.

Enterprising politicians (and what politician isn't modelling enterprise where his/her own advantage is concerned?), like Sam 'Dastardly' could save dollars to get paid extra dollars. Bargain!

Of course under the 'One World' government of OLO's International Socialists there would be no separate sovereign nations. But there would still be a need for paperwork and permits. A lot of paper and permits. But don't you 'punters'(sic) be worrying about that.

s44 is something, isn't it? When one thinks about all of the effort put into trying to sort the wheat from the chaff in selections and failing to do that. But wee li'l s44 has managed to do it for the Senate, twice recently. Wow!

Loudmouth: or the children of anyone born in their country - is automatically a citizen.

The USA is the only one I know of that this applies too. There may be others, but I don't think so.

Bazz : It should also ban persons who belong to political groups or religions who advocate overthrowing parliamentary government.

I'm fairly sure that that is covered under "Treason" in a different Section. I'll look for it & comment later.

Alan B: Abusive drunks, bankrupts and one or two who'd not look too out of place, wearing brown shirts and jackboots?

& The Greenies/PC & other Lefty self abusers. Don't forget them.

Yutsie: unless a significant number of Australians were to vote to be represented by these Yanks.

Americans always remain Americans unless they renounce their American Citizenship. If they renounce & take on Australian Citizenship, I have no problem. If they haven't renounced then I do. That is what this is all about. Durrr...

By the way, have you renounced your Indian/SiriLankan/Pakistani/whatever Citizenship?

Hi Everyone,

Foxy, yes I know there's a Union Jack on our flag, that does't mean I support a foreigner representing our intesests.
Also, this is 'touchy' as I don't want to imply that you are any less Aussie when you were born here.
But I must say in many cases it's the children of immigrants who are not assimilating, joining gangs and are causing much of our problems.

Is Mise, I don't support the idea of being represented by dual citizens.
Dual citizenship means dual loyalties, and I'll give you an example.
Take Jewish-Australians as an example, in all likeliness their real loyalty will be to Israel first. (No disrespect)
Why would I support a system that allowed the potential to be represented by those with loyalties elsewhere?
All I'm asking for as a requirement is a person whos loyalties and interests only involve Australia.

Yuyutu, you make a fair point in so far as equality, but if you don't want your laws decided by Australians, then you have the option to go elsewhere, it's not like I could or should have to go to a foreign country to be reprented by an Australian.

illmessagio,
You ask what is Australian, with a means to categorically say, 'you are' and 'you aren't', but what if I didn't like that 'yes/no' 'black/white' argument and I instead said lets make it percentage.
I've tracked my ancestry back about 8 or 9 generations in this country and still can't find out how I even got here. I'm told my ancestors came on the third fleet but I can't find evidence of it.
Early records can be obscure. My Great Grandfather was promoted to CO on the battlefield of Gallipoli after his CO was shot. I'm told he was Lieutenant Colonel but the Australian War Memorial only list him as Major and I need more info. My grandmother was part indigenous and came from the last Aboriginal family in the Burragorang Vally before the Warramba Dam.
How do I compare to Yassmin Abdel Magied (Queenslander of the Year) as represented as a percentage Australian?

[con't]
I could add more history: I have ancentors that built now heritage listed houses with their bare hands in the 1800's, family that took part in the Brisbane to Gladstone (may have been on a boat that took line honours) for decades and the Sydney to Hobart, another uncle that won the Morrish Medal in the VFL and my family contributed to this nation by fighting in all the major wars.
How does that compare as a percent Australian?

You see, if you don't like the argument, just change it.

And Alan B, you know I can't really argue with facts, dammit.
(Unless those so called facts have to do with global warming)