That is what I got from Jim's message ,Tim.
He makes an imperative point---It is unadulterated racism that allows
sections 25 and 51 xxvi to remain in our constitution.
The fact that these sections do remain, goes to show how ill-informed or
racist or both the Australian population is---we must continue to call for
further referendums to remove these racist sections, as well as any other
desired changes.
However, if we take this opportunity to replace the foreign Monarch with an
Australian Head of State, we will hopefully begin taking a greater interest
in, and more responsibility for, our Constitution----the Constitutional
World does not end on Nov. 6.
Laurie
Laurie and Desley Forde [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------
Tim Dunlop wrote.......
-----Original Message-----
From: tdunlop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sunday, October 24, 1999 6:30 PM
Subject: Re: [recoznet2] Something to carefully consider
>This is a really interesting post, but I wasn't sure what was being said
>towards the end. Was it being said that we are racist if we vote yes to
the
>preamble or that we are racist if we vote yes to the republic? It seems to
>say that we should destroy the ballot paper (ie, make it informal, neither
>yes nor no) thus suggesting that a yes for either question would be racist.
>But I really wasn't sure and if someone could clarify the point I'd
>appreciate it.
>
>Thanks
>
>Tim
>
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: Yes No or Informal... the Australian Constitution...
>Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 21:02:45 +0800
>From: "Jim Duffield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Organization: Settlers for First Nation Australia
>To: "Yagan Mob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>>
>>OK, more on this problematic document, over which many have
>>allegedly perspired...
>>
>>I've started to get some answers to my query about the subtleties of
>>the "Command of the naval and military forces" including a
>>conversation with Professor Craven at NDU in Fremantle (thanks
>>Professor). I think that I could be persuaded that the amended
>>document is no more sinister than the old. Perhaps.
>>
>>Now for the cruncher. "Race" as a 'fact' of constitutional law. In
>>1993 at the Canberra conference: THE POSITION OF
>>INDIGENOUS PEOPLE IN NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONS
>>conducted by the COUNCIL FOR ABORIGINAL RECONCILIATION
>>and the CONSTITUTIONAL CENTENARY FOUNDATION, Mr Ron
>>Castan, AM QC, said of Section 25 of our constitution:
>>
>>"The final point I would make is that to our unutterable shame, we
>>still have in the Constitution Section 25, which was not altered in
>>1967. That section explicitly says that where a state provides by its
>>laws that the people of any race are not entitled to vote, then those
>>people are not counted among the people, those who are to be
>>represented by the parliamentary democracy by the houses of
>>parliament in Canberra. How we can have left that racist provision in
>>our Constitution to today is utterly beyond me. If I can provide an
>>issue or an option for the Constitutional Centenary Foundation and
>>the Council for Reconciliation to take forward, it is getting rid of
>>that
>>basic racist clause from our Constitution, in addition to the other
>>matters I have mentioned.
>>
>>And what was done about Section 25 in the intervening years?
>>Nothing.
>>
>>So what does S25 say? This:
>>
>>"Provision as to races disqualified from voting
>>25. For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all
>>persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections for the
>>more numerous House of the Parliament of the State, then, in
>>reckoning the number of the people of the State or of the
>>Commonwealth, persons of the race resident in that State shall not
>>be counted. "
>>
>>Take this together with S51. xxvi:
>>
>>"Legislative powers of the Parliament
>>51.The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to
>>make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the
>>Commonwealth with respect to:
>>
>> ...xxvi.The people of any race, for whom it is deemed necessary to
>>make special laws; "
>>
>>And we now know from the High Court that this can be interpreted to
>>not just mean 'for' but also 'against' a minority identified by "race."
>>
>>What are my points?
>>
>>1. "Race" is a social construct not a scientific truth. It is a piece
>>of
>>european folk taxonomy. It cannot be shown to exist outside of a
>>phenotype (ie. in the genotype) in us, the homo sapiens sapiens of this
>>planet.
>>
>>2. How did it get into our constitution? Courtesy of Sir Sam
>>Griffiths coaxing Sir John Forrest and Western Australia into the
>>federation, with the States to retain power over Aboriginal
>>Australians, as a piece of eugenics. Yet in spite of its demise with
>>Adolph in 1945, we in Australia continue to give it a legal identity in
>>our Australian constitution.
>>
>>3. Please read the proposed Preamble, then consider the issue of
>>"race":
>>
>>"Preamble
>>With hope in God, the Commonwealth of Australia is constituted as a
>>democracy with a federal system of government to serve the common
>>good.
>>
>>We the Australian people commit ourselves to this Constitution:
>>
>>proud that our national unity has been forged by Australians from
>>many ancestries;
>>
>>never forgetting the sacrifices of all who defended our country and
>>our liberty in time of war;
>>
>>upholding freedom, tolerance, individual dignity and the rule of law;
>>
>>honouring Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, the nation's first
>>people, for their deep kinship with their lands and for their ancient
>>and continuing cultures which enrich the life of our country;
>>
>>recognising the nation-building contribution of generations of
>>immigrants;
>>
>>mindful of our responsibility to protect our unique natural
>>environment;
>>
>> supportive of achievement as well as equality of opportunity for all;
>>
>> and valuing independence as dearly as the national spirit which binds
>>us together in both adversity and success."
>>
>>Yes, I know that the preamble is a political sop and meaningless in
>>terms of law, but we do it with the hope that "God" might fix it,
>>because none of the bloody lawyers who have pored over the
>>document since Ron Castan have had the sense or conscience to
>>attend to it!
>>
>>Look at the political buzzwords; "national unity" "many ancestries"
>>"tolerance" and get this one "honouring Aborigines and Torres Strait
>>Islanders" and "recognising the nation building contribution of
>>generations of immigrants" and finally "equality of opportunity for
>>all"!!! How do you honour anyone when you retain the power for the
>>continuance of a genocide?
>>
>>My point here? I do hope that it is apparent without it having to be
>>spelt out, the entire bloody preamble is humbug.
>>
>>How much money has been spent on this Republican thing? Tens of
>>millions at least? Yet we go forward into the next century with with a
>>constitution of which Spencer and Galton and the Nazi Party would be
>>most proud.
>>
>>I cannot be party to a "we the unknowing being led by the unthinking,
>>the ignorant, racist and incompetent" constitution.
>>
>>Any Australian of whom it might be said that they are NOT racist
>>must make a conscious decision to spoil their vote.
>>
>>They must vote informal to register their protest over any legal
>>continuance being attributed to this racist diatribe that has some
>>sixty odd amendments, and yet the most pressing need is omitted.
>>
>>Getting it wrong a century ago is perhaps understandable, even
>>forgivable. However, to continue this, even as a NO vote is to accede
>>to the perpetration of a most extraordinary form of racism. It is
>>clearly constitutionally approved power to discriminate based on the
>>colour of one's skin.
>>
>>We carry this into the next century for our children's children?
>>
>>Shame, Australia, shame...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>------- End of forwarded message -------
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived
at
>http://www.mail-archive.com/
>>To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the
>body
>>of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
>>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
>>This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without
>permission from the
>>copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and
>research under the "fair
>>use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be
distributed
>further without
>>permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
>>
>>RecOzNet2 is archived for members @ http://www.mail-archive.com/
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
>To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the
body
>of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
>This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without
permission from the
>copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and
research under the "fair
>use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed
further without
>permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
>
>RecOzNet2 is archived for members @ http://www.mail-archive.com/
>
-------------------------------------------------------
RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
from the
copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
the "fair
use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
without
permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
RecOzNet2 is archived for members @ http://www.mail-archive.com/
