I thought that for me this discussion had run its
course. Then yesterday conversations with friends
brought out different perspectives that I hadn't
considered.

Some people seemed to feel that we cling to the
date of Australia Day that commemorates only the
establishment of British settlement of this continent.

26th January says nothing about the country we have become
since, nor about the Indigenous people who lived here for
tens of thousands of years.

It was pointed out that if we had remained a colony of
Britain, this date would be relevant - but as we're not.
It isn't. I felt that it was a part of our history and
therefore it was relevant.

It was further said that Australia Day is made up of
3 stories - the Indigenous heritage, the British
institutions built on it, and the multicultural
migration. That we should celebrate each of these
stories whereas 26th January is an expression of only
one.

So what date would be relevant for an independent Australia?

The most liked answer was - the 9th July 1900 when the
Constitution of Australia was ratified creating a new
state that we were no longer a British colony. It came
into being the following year.

A country's National Day usually is celebrated on the
country's gaining its independence.

Perhaps we could think about this further down the track?
I'm happy with the way things are right now.

I don't care what Foxy thinks, because I don't trust her. I will vote against anyone who tries to change the date of Australia Day, and steal the heritage of the Anglo-Australian and European peoples. I believe that Foxy is an enemy of humanity.

CM,

If you really don't care what Foxy thinks - why do you
continue to comment and try to slur her?

Go on admit it - you're a fan!

I've got a bitter enemy
His heart to hate he gave
I'm sure he'd like to see me die
So he could dance upon my grave

But then such is a quirk of fate
Because the poison in his heart
May just hasten his miserable life
And force him to depart

Both the UK and Australia present themselves
in the international community as beacons of
tolerance and diversity, as successful
expressions of multiculturalism and as
examples of the power of the core values
of Anglo-Liberalism.

Yet as we can see from a minority of internal
critics who try to persuasively argue that these
representations disguise systematic structures of
racial inequality and tolerance.

So on Australia Day - let us all remember:

"Tis The Season To Celebrate Australia's diversity
and all of our humanity!"

Australians all let us rejoice
Let everybody have a voice
The time has come for us to say
We love many things - from far away!

Why English is hard to learn:

We'll begin with box, the plural is boxes
But the plural of ox, is oxen not oxes
One fowl is a goose, and two are called geese
Yet the plural of moose, is never called meese

We speak of a brother but also of brethren
But though we say mother, we never say methren
Then the masculine pronouns are he, his and him
But imagine the feminine - she, shis, and shim ...

(Taken from the web).

I guess I did not realize
how passionate some people are about Australia Day.
I put up the discussion because Australia Day is
just around the corner and this discussion happens
every year. I thought it would be interesting to see
if views were still divided or if they had changed.

I made it clear that I personally wanted the date to
remain as is - for historic reasons.

Now, apparently I can't be trusted, and have been accused
of being an enemy of humanity?
That changing the date is stealing the heritage of
Anglo-Australian and European peoples.
Really?

The date will only be changed when the majority of
Australians vote to have it changed. Including Anglo-
Australians and Europeans. It has to be a majority
decision. So "stealing" anyone's heritage is wrong.

Same as only acknowleding the Anglo-Australian and European
heritage is also wrong.
It will be a majority decision to change the date.

As for me being an enemy of humanity?

I don't think that my advocating for respecting differences,
acknowledging skills, and perspectives, and wishing to
create a more inclusive, equitable and harmonious society
counts as being an enemy of humanity.

Neither would my saying that people should be treated as
individuals. That we should not pre-judge or make
assumptions and that we should accept people for who they are.

I think that someone who sees this as being an enemy of
humanity psychologists would probably declare them
to be an extremist -, a fundamentalist, of unsound mind.
Luckily, these people are a tiny minority. Both in Australia
and the UK.

But perhaps I am being too harsh. I need to beter dodge the
spitballs and make allowances for people who have a strong
sense of belonging only to their own kind. There are many
people who don't like differences and see stability only
with their own kind.

Associate with whoever you want. This is Australia.
It's your choice. And, its ours to not want to associate
with you. Don't try to force your way of thinking
onto the rest of the country.

It won't happen.