Gerula

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Gerula 1 points 1 year ago

Mare păcat dar le mulțumesc tuturor celor ce au făcut Filelist posibil toți acești ani.

[–] Gerula 18 points 1 year ago

Are there people still naive enough to believe this conman?

[–] Gerula 1 points 1 year ago

Black belt level bullshido!

[–] Gerula 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Thank you for your reply. It's simple:

  • if they have Australian citizenship (I think in 67 was a push for this) then they already have all the Constitutional rights and obligations like every other Australian citizen. Why are these extra steps necessary?

  • if they don't: what is their current legal status? Why not just give them citizenship and thus having the right of representation in the Parliament and so forth?

[–] Gerula 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok, thank you for your patience.

[–] Gerula 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

But aren't Aboriginal people citizens of Australia and so already part of the Constitution thus having legal rights like everyone else? What are the extra rights and representation needed?

[–] Gerula 34 points 1 year ago (12 children)

New to the subject here: why is it a desirable thing to recognise Aboriginal people in the Constitution?

As I read through the article in the Aboriginal camp not everyone wants this. So I'm puzzled.

[–] Gerula 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok, then maybe I'm at fault and I didn't understand what you were trying to say.

[–] Gerula -4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Ohhhh, we're discussing hypotheticals, sorry I thought you were serious.

Because then for sure you would have taken in consideration that religious affiliation, nationality and branding are pretty different things. The level of psychological involvement and the way these elements interact and define ones individual structure is quite incomparable. Usually for religious people (especially fundamenlists) religion does define their personal values, morality an so on. This IS the purpose of religion after all.

And then of course you would have taken in consideration that this is a conflict with mainly a religious conflict. Although you can say palestinians fight mainly for their land the other Muslim countries that support them have also religious motives.

And of course it's a fact that they didn't choose to take another religious affiliation or as you say a different brand.

[–] Gerula -2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

But they don't, so you argument is invalid.

[–] Gerula 1 points 1 year ago

Ok, good luck.

[–] Gerula 2 points 1 year ago

Actually I think it translates in: because of what brown people are doing thousands of miles away, brown people in Australia - which support and simpatise - are going to have to deal with this shit.

view more: ‹ prev next ›