The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Should We Change The Date of Australia Day?

Should We Change The Date of Australia Day?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. Page 14
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. 17
  13. ...
  14. 35
  15. 36
  16. 37
  17. All
Gee Loudmouth... Your question Are the aborigine better off since the invasion really shows your ignorance.

So let's try to answer it for you by using you as an example...

Would you be better off if we came and took your home, your family, your culture and destroyed it?

Would you be better off if we forced a false religion down your throat and treated you like a third class citizen?

Would you be better off having know nothings like you asking such silly questions?

How would you cope if your numbers of your ethnicity dropped from he from 1,250,000 in 1788 to 50,000 in 1930 due mostly to small pox and other diseases introduced in the invasion? Would it affect your society much?

How would you feel about your fellow countrymen ignoring the massacres that your people suffered? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_of_Indigenous_Australians

How would you cope with your children being stolen from you and put into institutions where they were abused physically, emotionally and sexually?

How would you have coped as a child being torn away from your parents?

How would you have dealt with knowing that the whites deliberately tried to breed the black out of you? http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/caught-up-in-a-scientific-racism-designed-to-breed-out-the-black/2008/02/13/1202760399034.html

How would you have coped having alcohol introduced into you lives that ruined them? http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/health/aboriginal-alcohol-consumption

How would you have coped with the heads of your relatives being stolen? http://theconversation.com/museums-are-returning-indigenous-human-remains-but-progress-on-repatriating-objects-is-slow-67378

I could go on but I think you get my drift.

Of course some aborigines have transitioned fairly well into modern society.

We have had thousands of years of change into what we are now but hey we expect them to change from day one and till now 230 years later starting totally from nothing!

The aborigine lived at one with the land, with no need for structures and minimal impact on the environment for over 50,000years. We have plundered and nearly destroyed this place in 230 years.

How dare we ignore these facts and pretend we are better!

Wake UP!
Posted by Opinionated2, Saturday, 20 January 2018 10:37:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Banjo....Try mixing with a more educated mob...you'll find the push amongst reasonable, caring people is there.

They don't waffle on about..."Doing unto others"...whilst doing the opposite like believers...They actually do there best to follow that great rule...

ttbn as usual you dish it out but when called to account you turn to jelly. You refer to people as self haters, childish idiots and this a marxist plot but you are totally wrong as usual.

Leoj, Some aborigines don't care about the date but most do and a better date would go to healing some of the pain.

We have whitewashed history and we need to set things right. We caused the problems in Aboriginal Australia with our theft, deceptive practices, alcohol, culture-busting and oppression.

Why attack Foxy wanting change for the better?...Keep up the good work Foxy! Fair dinkum Aussies that want everyone to benefit from a prosperous united Australia are on your side.

Warren Mundine wants the same as most thinking Aussies...better health, better opportunities and better outcomes for indigenous Australians but closing down this debate won't help that.

People who use Warren Mundine to stifle debate are only scared of better outcomes for aborigines and are being deceptive.

Many Governments in our country have used the 26th of January to introduce change but that doesn't undo the fact that the majority of aborigines would appreciate the change. Again these are arguments brought up without the aboriginal wishes in mind and simply against reasonable change.

Luciferase knows his/her stuff...The fact that 26th of January 1948 and 1949 were chosen regarding citizenship changes was based on the invasion of the first fleet which means the same thing anyway.

Steelredux and Luciferase make the best intelligent arguments for the date... 22 November 1984 That was the real date of greatest unity amongst all Aussies.

So in effect we have two groups of people...Anti-changers and those who are pro change for the better.

The believers on here generally oppose all change and yet say they follow Jesus...I think Jesus was a man of change!

Religion hasn't served these people well!
Posted by Opinionated2, Saturday, 20 January 2018 11:31:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When I see (I no longer read them) the over-long and generally incorrect diatribes of the immature Left posters among us, I am reminded of a comment that I read: "Sometimes the only people willing to give advice in a relativistic society (the one we live in now) are those with the least to offer". The more sensible and knowledgeable - and experienced - including those of the old, traditional left as well as conservatives, are tending to keep out of things, probably stunned by the silliness and abuse of the new Left who are not aware that they are parroting stuff that we older people have actually seen fail.
Posted by ttbn, Saturday, 20 January 2018 11:42:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I just read a legal argument that stated that if January 26th 1788 was an "English Settlement" aboriginals are entitled to native title of land, i.e. Marbo. If it was an invasion before WW11 there is no entitlement of the occupants to native title land. For those that call it "Invasion Day" they must now just submit to the new occupiers of the land. Because Native Title was granted the English came as a settler, not an invader.

Quote,"Because international law recognises all territories acquired through invasion and annexation by force, prior to World War II, as lawful conquests.
This 'Right of Conquest' doctrine was first conceived by the International Law Commission of the United Nations and later adopted as UN General Assembly Resolution 3314.
Provided that all citizens of a lawfully conquered territory are granted equal rights by the local law, international law doesn't consider the descendants of the conqueror and the conquered as two separate peoples.
This in turn invalidates any claims to separate land rights under the same jurisdiction.
As one of the 193 member states of the United Nations, Australia is not exempt from this doctrine.
Yet we do recognise separate land rights because the historic Mabo Decision in 1992 rested on the correct presumption that Australia was settled, not invaded.
In their ruling, Justices Brennan, Deane, Gaudron, Toohey, Mason and McHugh acknowledged that native title could have been intentionally extinguished by the use of government powers, but wasn't.
Had Australia actually been invaded, the descendants of its native population would be classified as a conquered people and their land rights would be abolished under UN Resolution 3314."
Posted by Josephus, Saturday, 20 January 2018 12:50:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Self-Op2,

As a know-nothing, I still have as much right to my il-informed opinions as you do, provided I'm prepared to defend them :)

Massacres ? I'm glad you brought that up: with thousands of massacre rumoured, that would male many thousands of Ivan Milats. Surely anybody who could trace their ancestry back to someone on the receiving end of one of those massacre, would be vitally interested in uncovering the truth, i.e. evidence of a massacre. Surely they would be clamouring for thorough forensic examinations of such sites ? Listen, you may hear them ................... hmmmm, no, I can't hear anything. I wonder why that is ?

We can drag up all the bar-fly rumours of this and that atrocity, but others are entitled to draw your attention to the need for evidence of them: after all, it's THEIR ancestors you may be slagging. So let's see:

* from the earliest days, Philip was instructed, in writing, to recognise the traditional use-rights of the Aboriginal people, to use the land as they always had done,to hunt, fish and gather food, camp, carry out ceremonies, etc. Those rights were enshrined in colonial legislation in the late 1840s - certainly in SA in 1850. Such specific clauses were written into every pastoral lease. Current legislation continues to recognise those rights.

*. forcing religion on people ? Any evidence of this ? Missionaries preaching, is that it ? What would you expect, that's their bag.

*. it's fun to exaggerate early populations. I would have put the 'real' population, taking drought into account, at 300,000 - perhaps up to 500,000 after a long period of very few droughts and plenty of food: pretty rare in Australia. Droughts killed off great numbers of people, forcing groups in harder country to move into the territories of other groups, provoking intra-group battles, and stopping births for many years - after all, young children and old people would have died, no babies would have been born, etc.

[TBC]
Posted by Loudmouth, Saturday, 20 January 2018 1:00:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
[continued]

*. And nobody in the world had cures for many of the diseases that ravaged Black and White alike - often not until after the Second World War.

*. Stolen Generation: how many cases brought successfully before a court ? One. Anybody who thinks they have a case, would also have a file, somewhere in their State Archives, it would just a matter of asking. My wife easily found hers, with its inevitable surprises :)

*. 'Breeding out the Black' ? Then why was there legislation to prohibit casual relations between White men and aboriginal women , but never any legislation against inter-marriage ? Or are you suggesting that inter-marriage should have also been illegal ?

* Alcohol ? In all colonies, it was illegal to supply Aboriginal people with alcohol. A publican could lose his licence, or do six months, or both. Other whitefellas could also be jailed too. One of the implicit demands of Aboriginal people after the War was the right to drink. One major reason why Aboriginal men worked was to buy alcohol from sly-groggers. One reason why the 1950s seemed to be one of the worst periods for child neglect and mortality was there was enough work, therefore enough money, to keep the wife pissed as well.

*. your take on the pace of change, that people should stay in the Stone Age: well, currently there are around 54,000 Indigenous university graduates, mostly in mainstream, standard courses. Perhaps you want to complain about that ?

*. minimal impact on the environment: well, ecologists may disagree with you, that Aboriginal firing practices helped to transform the landscape, wipe out many botanic species, promote (slightly, I would suggest) soil erosion and impair the habitat of many animal species. Not consciously or deliberately, but inevitably. All human societies have transformed their environments, usually for the worse.

Yes, how dare we ignore these facts ?

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Saturday, 20 January 2018 1:05:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. Page 14
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. 17
  13. ...
  14. 35
  15. 36
  16. 37
  17. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy