Foxy says: "I don't make stuff up."
Well she's got that right. In just about every post I've seen her make all she does is just give links and effectively cut and paste the text of others. Very rarely does she ever create her own valid logical argument. If she's so sure that the Constitution specifically singles out Aborigines and/or Torres Strait Islanders and treats them differently (especially in a negative why) then why can't she just cite the Chapter-Part-Section? If she simply did this then anyone interested could verify her claim and I personally would believe her. She's making the claim so the burden of proof rests on her.

thinkabit,

Go back and read my posts in this discussion.
I have expressed my thoughts quite clearly.
I give links when they are appropriate to
verify what's being claimed. It would do
you some good to do think before you spray.

What is your age thinkabit? I'm 68.

The 100th anniversary of the Tulsa race massacre which took place on May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of White residents, many of them deputized and given weapons by city officials, attacked Black residents and destroyed their homes and businesses. The attacks, carried out on the ground and from private aircraft, burned and destroyed more than 35 square blocks of Tulsa's black neighborhood, at the time it was the wealthiest Black community in the United States, known as the "Black Wall Street". More than 800 people were admitted to hospitals, and as many as 6,000 Black residents were interned and up to 300 died. The massacre was the result of an accusation that Black shoeshine boy Dick Rowland, had assaulted Sarah Page, a White elevator operator girl. About 10,000 Black people were left homeless and property damage amounted to more than $1.5 million in real estate and $750,000 in personal property (equivalent to $32.65 million in 2020 values)

No Foxy you haven't verify your claims! You are claiming that somewhere in the constitution there is at least one section that specifically discriminates against aborigines. It is really, really simple for you to justify this claim- all you have to do is cite the section number.
Here is the constitution: http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Constitution. I challenge you to find a single mention of words like "Aborigine" or "Native". But you won't be able to do that: Why? Because (from my memory) the constitution treats ALL races/ethnicities EXACTLY the same. Nowhere is there any mention of any SPECIFIC group of people- be they Australian Native, European, Asia, etc.

Now, I don't know what you think racism is, but you will find that most agree that it is when one race is treated differently from another. So as it stands currently the constitution has NO inherent racism towards any specific group. However what you want to do is contaminate the constitution with it. You wish to specifically mention aborigines which will ADD deliberate directed racism to the document.

Just re-read my previous post. The first line should obviously be "No Foxy you haven't verified your claims", ie. "verified" instead of "verify". There's probably other small mistakes, as I usually make, in there as well.

--=--

Paul1405, I'm closer to 50 years than 40 years old.

Foxy,

It may be an old fashioned concept, but I believe in equality under the law and equality in representation. When you start creating special representation and parliamentary influence based on race, you have the first stages or "separate development" as apartheid was known.

While your intentions are well meant, the solution is worse than the problem.