Australian national broadcaster ABC has projected three states voted No, effectively defeating the referendum.

  • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    The constitution currently allows for laws,to be specifically made about ATSI people. I didn’t see any of the people worried about inequality protesting that. Ever.

    • morry040@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Not specifically about ATSI people, but of any race. The ‘races power’ part of the Constitution (section 51(xxvi)) reads as follows:

      Current text:
      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:
      “the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws”

      Original text:
      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:
      “the people of any race, other than the aboriginal race in any State, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws”

      https://www.ausconstitution.org/home/chapter-1-the-parliament/part-v-powers-of-the-parliament/section-51/26-race-power

      • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yes, as ATSI people arent currently recognized in the constitution. In practice, it’s only used to target them.

      • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s odd, as your first sentence talks about laws. Maybe you said something you didn’t mean.

          • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yes, one can. You however were comparing comparison under laws, which is speaking about legalities. You were incorrect. Doubling down just makes it clear you are not discussing in good faith, but have been caught in a lie.

            • MxM111@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              No, I do not know how you get this impression. Please reread my posts. I was talking about what laws should be for good society, not what can or can not be allowed legally.