Agree with most of this Everald. Having served under a flag, with the union jack under one corner. Seeing flag burning by folk that might be hard placed to register as much as one sixteenth aborigine heritage. my sentiments to the voice referendum are shifting toward NO!

And also, when these mixed blood activists start claiming sovereignty! I lean towards NO.

In aborigine culture and tradition, no aborigine owned land, conversely, the land owned them, they belonged to the land and were never ever more than custodians. And only a small cohort have resided here for 60,000 years.

Others came later and later. With the last wave of native migration coming some 14,000 years ago, when the Asian wolf (Dingo, companion hunting dog) was introduced to this wide brown land. There were consequently at least 500 different tongues as spoken native language

I believe we need an act to determine who is an aborigine and who is essentially white. And for mine 50% is the end point for establishing aborigine status. And reliant on DNA analysis, rather than feeling aboriginal.

25% was a number accepted by American natives, simply to make the numbers, as it is here. And to win the extra income/entitlements/sit down money, that goes with that title?

For mine, anything less than 50% and they are like you and me, essentially (more white than black) white fellas.
Alan B.

Dan, were you looking in a mirror as you made your "extremely robust" and therefore fitting remarks?

Don't forget to take the meds! Otherwise, I'll turn the torch off as you slide down the beam to escape. And then you may have a reason to/for, hate, violence and unrequited anger.

It's not the fall that hurts, but the sudden stop at the bottom. Who put those unprintable (ouch, ouch) rocks there and who let the dogs out? My what big sharp teeth you have, Grandma. And leave off, they're not prairie oysters.

High C, you've never done that before?

Y'll have a nice day now y'hear.
Alan B.

It is time for reason to prevail.
Time to put aside the idea of blaming people living today for historical events.
Thankfully, I don't think it is as widespread a 'concept' as one would suppose.
I personally know persons of mixed 'race' who do not favour that view.
I have known them for a long time, and have never seen any evidence of such an attitude.
So they must be using their own thought processes to develop a logical view of life.
One can only hope this expands to others, and becomes the norm in our society.

No one is born with a knowledge of history.
That is taught to them.
So children are being taught to think that someone 'owes' them something.
They are taught to carry on what amounts to an inter-generational feud.
So I blame the 'elders', who must be teaching them to think like that.
They are the ones responsible for this debacle.
It is time for those 'elders' to make a careful assessment of their goals.

Anything divisive should be discouraged?
Having two flags on display, as it done in many places now, disparages and divides australia?
My (reasonable?) view is that we need only one flag.
But let us not go overboard with a zealous intensity of feeling about this.
A flag is physically a piece of cloth.
It is only what it reminds us of that is important.
The flag itself is an inanimate object: it does not do much except hang around.

Just a final thought thought or two:

I quote: 'While all this is true, Elizabeth was not personally responsible for it, nor is anyone living on our continent.....'
That is right. No one living now is in any way responsible for those historical events.
We have no obligation whatsoever to anyone, for actions carried out by others long ago.

I quote again: 'Once this first step is taken, consideration can be given to the signing of a Treaty.....'
No! One cannot sign a treaty with dead persons.
As this happened centuries ago, there is no one alive from that time who can agree to anything now.

Quoting yet again: 'it is important to note that no indigenous tribe ever surrendered or ceded their land to the British. It remains their own to this day.'
No it doesn't.
Ownership means occupying, using, and above all, being able to DEFEND an area of land.
The indigenous population clearly lost control and 'ownership' of the land a long time ago.
Those living back then had nothing, except knowledge, to pass on to their descendants.

And those descendants are predominantly mixed race now?
So they have obligations to their european ancestry too?
We who live in Australia must all make the best use possible of any knowledge and infrastructure passed to us by a previous generation.
And try to live together without making absurd and error based demands on others.

Dear Foxy

I agree with you 100%.

Regards

Cody

We are asked to acknowledge and honour their Leaders , Past ,Present and Future .

It's a pity that it is not recipculated .

Same goes for the flag .

Unless I see the EXACT wording of this change , then there is no way I will support it .

Trust a politician?