Wed - 26 Jan 2011

The story of the day is the Constitution.

The Constitution of Australia stands out as one of the most stable in the world. It has weathered challenges on a number of occasions and when changes are suggested it is the one time that Australians tend to stir from their lethargy and think about an issue. This latest challenge comes from a few people in the indigenous community.

Noel Person suggests that the Constitution serves everybody but the aboriginal population. He is of course missing the point. Just because the Constitution doesn't specifically refer to aboriginals doesn't mean that they aren't covered by. In fact the contrary is true. It should and does cover all people recognised as Australian citizens equally.

The moment any individual group is allowed to be treated in a separate or special way the concept of equality vanishes.The definition of the word aboriginal means one native to that country. How many generations are required before this comes into effect? The current indigenous population moved here across the land bridge from the North. Given that there is evidence they wiped out the indigenous population they have effectively replaced those here.

Some families not of aboriginal descent are fifth and sixth generation. A large number of those considered aboriginal have less than half "aboriginal blood" in them. As a country we have this weird worldview that even the tiniest amount of aboriginal blood entitles that person to be called aboriginal. In some cases no aboriginal blood at all is required in the mix. In what strange universe does this makes sense?

The Constitution should not be modified to name any individual group. The special treatment of aboriginals to date has fostered division, seen huge sums of money turned to dust, and all of the plans of the fluffy headed socialists fail.

We are either Australians will not. The Constitution is for all Australians Black, White, Brown, Yellow and none of this should allow this to be changed.

In Letters to the Editor today there are the usual mix of mono dimensional letters from those whose sole source of news is from the mainstream media. I don't understand why the Editor publishers such trite material