There is a difference between between ethical beliefs and religious ones, but there can also be elements that lead to outcomes based on a range of principles or religious beliefs.

Using the word "culture", to set the word apart from "religion" is simplistic and denies culture to exist in its truest forms. It has been used by some to see Aboriginal people living in Australia not subject to criticism, which is a form of protectionism, which is not fair.

For example if one is to have a belief which sees them as individuals attend a church, a temple or a mosque for example they are considered "religious" in some way (and may be personally attacked), but if they take on Aboriginal beliefs, this by some is considered "cultural", with no questioning in place.

To put this into perspective, one of my relatives (who has a multiple pieced name), is part Aborignal. I have been told the reasons behind their name, and the reasons to why the full name, should not be spoken in full by others, and the reasons behind that. The reasons are very serious, and whilst I do not mention the full name to others, I respect the principles behind the naming principles, not because it's something I can deeply connect with.

Humans in principle are extremely anthropocentric. Many humans take a view, that that they own planet Earth, despite the fact humans did not create it. Many take the view they have they have a right to continually destroy its natural features and conveniently with Australia ignore the fact that plant and animal species were here first, with the land taken over by humans!

Finally, a river does not have rights (legal or non legal), and that is why the environmental movement has developed over time, to protect all of its elements.

Anyway, to get back to topic somehow: revered natural features as 'persons'.

In many traditional societies, natural features are believed to be more than that, to be invested with some form of supernatural qualities, or even to be divine. In Western societies, natural features are to be admired, protected by law, and promoted as part of a nation's natural beauty.

One question is: is it appropriate for traditional beliefs to be enshrined in the legal systems of modern nations ?

Another question: in practice, who will represent the Whanganui River in its inevitable interactions with the Department for the Environment, with any infrastructure project such as bridges or roads, and their maintenance ? If it lies within, or crosses, the boundaries of local councils, who will represent its interests at council meetings ?

Clearly, a local Maori group will have all of those powers. They will speak for it. So, the burning question is: will it ask, through them, for funds to maintain its pristine condition ? Or for the necessary administrative facilities ? Will it demand, through them, some access to ministers ?

These are important issues. A thousand Indigenous organisations here in Australia are closely watching any developments around this issue, and their far-reaching implications.

Joe

Hi Joe,

When it comes to the Whanganui River in Aotearoa, the Pakeha Government of New Zealand, acting in the name of the British Crown has the same legal authority to pass laws affecting the river as it does to pass laws affecting Mount Everest. None what so ever! Maybe the government of Botswana should pass a law ceding the Murray River to Kazakhstan, since so many people are willing to accept these sorts of rulings without question.

Just got back from a Cook Islander beach side wedding, my partners son-in-laws brother, fantastic time was had by all, put on a great show of island dancing, by the girls and boys. The Cook Islanders are similar people to Tahitians, plenty to eat and drink, pig on a spit etc, those "pagans" sure know how to enjoy themselves. When the crew of the 'Bounty' landed in Tahiti you can see why they didn't want to leave. Me thinks they were all about to turn pagan! Sure beats getting flogged by Captain Bligh, seven days a week!

Paul1405, 'you can see why they didn't want to leave'

You are talking about the Cook Islanders who migrated to Australia via New Zealand. They sure were lucky, but more canny one has to admit and yes, for some it probably has been one long party. From the 1980s New Zealand's lacklustre economy made Australia the better target.

Perhaps the ABC could do without its economic experts and use migration to predict economic conditions. The migrants are better at it.

However these stories are just the magician's (and salesman's) tricks to occupy the target while he is being relieved of his wallet.

As a child playing with indigenous friends, there were many places they could not go through their tribal superstition. As for going about in the dusk or dark, forget it! I don't know how all of the new secret business got going - I have suspicions it is all due to the encouraged Cargo Cult mentality and too many with humanities degrees and no jobs except in government. But back then (and not so long ago) indigenous life was limited and hampered by animist superstition and the 'known' malevolence of many inanimate objects.

It is 'Whitey' who should be charging for being the saviour and protector against the dark eddies of the waters, those threatening places and the night.

Thousands of stories and more being 'discovered' every day, but where is that 'fact checker' when it is needed?

Rather than allowing the serial activist nuisances such as the woeful NSW Greens to drive in more wedges in society, we should be celebrating the rich inheritance of myth as myth, interesting yarns to spin by the fire, when the red is uncorked.

http://theconversation.com/dreamings-and-place-aboriginal-monsters-and-their-meanings-25606

Holy Ireland ! It's the German fatherland and Holy Mother Russia putting the fear of gods into Mussies.
"Pope Francis has criticised the naming of the US military's largest non-nuclear explosive ever used in combat as "the mother of all bombs".
"I was ashamed when I heard the name," the pontiff told an audience of students at the Vatican.
"A mother gives life and this one gives death, and we call this device a mother. What is going on?" he asked."

what's going on? The bomb had 18,700 lbs explosive but it's daddy had 21,000 lbs.
".. attempt to deliver 21,000lb of explosives into a Nazi military base.. JFK Library and Museum website ... the ‘drone’, under the control of the mother planes, was to proceed on the mission which was to culminate in a crash dive on the target.”
-
The base had the V 3 cannon the mother of US mass shootings.