National anthem

[Russell]

A referendum was conducted and the majority of Australians voted for AAF to be our national anthem. To change or alter it in any way would require another referendum.

So it should.

By the way, there is no mention of Greeks, Italians, Chinese or Brazilians either.
The point is you put all ethic groups together (including the aborigines - I say aborigines and not indigenous because it refers to a person, that has been in a country or region from earliest times. Whilst indigenous refers to a person originating or occurring naturally in a particular place - they migrated here the same as every other group) and we are all Australians. Why do we have to single one group out all the time?

We would all like to be singled out but it is not feasible to do that.

If we are not all one and we are not free - then I can see a need to change it. If we are and I think that is correct, then leave it alone.

 

[Geo]

I dunno I think the offence to young would be less than the offence to free by those that oppose the anthem

 

[Russell]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

 

[cochise]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

So you are saying we can breed them out?

 

[Russell]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

So you are saying we can breed them out?

That is not what I am saying at all and you know it - you just want to stir the pot again Cochise.

 

[Elderslie_Tiger]

Now that's sorted whats next

 

[diedpretty]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

Yea but you still maintain your Irish ancestry - same with a person with an Indigenous ancestry.

 

[diedpretty]

From the first of January 2021 the Nation Anthem word will be changed from:
young and free
To:
one and free

Could be seen as everyone for themselves. Stuff you i'm ok.

 

[gregjm87]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

I think officially it is 1/16th to qualify as Indigenous.
But the 2nd point regarding a rule for one not all is not at all true. In my experience the overwhelming majority of people embrace their roots, be they Irish, Pacific Islander, European or Indigenous.

 

[cochise]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

So you are saying we can breed them out?

That is not what I am saying at all and you know it - you just want to stir the pot again Cochise.

Then what are you trying to say?

The accepted criteria for proof of Aboriginality is:

* being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent

* identifying as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person

* being accepted as such by the community in which you live, or formerly lived.

You are saying that some people who are identifying they are aboriginal are not because the percentage of their aboriginality is not high enough. That is simply wrong and you claim I am stirring the pot, I am not stirring the pot, I think your post is a terrible take on the situation.

I will also say the use of the term free is as big of a problem as the use of the word young, but feel the history of the song is an even bigger issue when discussing its appropriateness as the National Anthem.

 

[earl]

You are saying that some people who are identifying they are aboriginal are not because the percentage of their aboriginality is not high enough. That is simply wrong and you claim I am stirring the pot, I am not stirring the pot, I think your post is a terrible take on the situation.

I agree. Showing respect to our Indigenous culture to me is the sign of a progressive and enlightened country and culture.

 

[cochise]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

I will also say if that Irish person continues to live in Ireland they would consider themselves to be Irish?

 

[Leck]

If we wanted to truly embrace Australia's indigenous past and present, we should have consulted the elders and caretakers of our country.

Changing a couple of words won't make any difference.

The onus is on the government to get it right.

But it seems like they don't care - so why not send out a brief to all Australian's to propose an inclusive anthem.

One that respects both cultures, an anthem we can all embrace and agree on?

A new Australian anthem deserves a national referendum rather than a pen-pushing politician telling us what to sing.

 

[Russell]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

So you are saying we can breed them out?

That is not what I am saying at all and you know it - you just want to stir the pot again Cochise.

Then what are you trying to say?

The accepted criteria for proof of Aboriginality is:

* being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent

* identifying as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person

* being accepted as such by the community in which you live, or formerly lived.

You are saying that some people who are identifying they are aboriginal are not because the percentage of their aboriginality is not high enough. That is simply wrong and you claim I am stirring the pot, I am not stirring the pot, I think your post is a terrible take on the situation.

I will also say the use of the term free is as big of a problem as the use of the word young, but feel the history of the song is an even bigger issue when discussing its appropriateness as the National Anthem.

Don't turn this into a ......

I was asking the question (I quote myself) "By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?"

Apart from a "I think 1/16th" from @gregjm87 - I have not had a relevant answer.

I am not interested in what people, consider themselves as. I am interested in officially what you are.

 

[Tim Sheens]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

So you are saying we can breed them out?

That is not what I am saying at all and you know it - you just want to stir the pot again Cochise.

Then what are you trying to say?

The accepted criteria for proof of Aboriginality is:

* being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent

* identifying as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person

* being accepted as such by the community in which you live, or formerly lived.

You are saying that some people who are identifying they are aboriginal are not because the percentage of their aboriginality is not high enough. That is simply wrong and you claim I am stirring the pot, I am not stirring the pot, I think your post is a terrible take on the situation.

I will also say the use of the term free is as big of a problem as the use of the word young, but feel the history of the song is an even bigger issue when discussing its appropriateness as the National Anthem.

Don't turn this into a ......

I was asking the question (I quote myself) "By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?"

Apart from a "I think 1/16th" from @gregjm87 - I have not had a relevant answer.

I am not interested in what people, consider themselves as. I am interested in officially what you are.

Which is what you have quoted Russ, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[cochise]

By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?

How far do we go back - an Aboriginal marries a white immigrant - the child becomes 50% Aboriginal/indigenous, same happens again, the child becomes 25% and so on.

Surely, if you are less than 50% you become an Australian or does this go to infinity?

If this happens with an Irish person marrying an Australian - their offspring do not keep considering that they are Irish, they say they are Australian.

One rule for one, a different rule for the rest.

So you are saying we can breed them out?

That is not what I am saying at all and you know it - you just want to stir the pot again Cochise.

Then what are you trying to say?

The accepted criteria for proof of Aboriginality is:

* being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent

* identifying as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person

* being accepted as such by the community in which you live, or formerly lived.

You are saying that some people who are identifying they are aboriginal are not because the percentage of their aboriginality is not high enough. That is simply wrong and you claim I am stirring the pot, I am not stirring the pot, I think your post is a terrible take on the situation.

I will also say the use of the term free is as big of a problem as the use of the word young, but feel the history of the song is an even bigger issue when discussing its appropriateness as the National Anthem.

Don't turn this into a ......

I was asking the question (I quote myself) "By the way, what constitutes an Aboriginal/Indigenous person?"

Apart from a "I think 1/16th" from @gregjm87 - I have not had a relevant answer.

I am not interested in what people, consider themselves as. I am interested in officially what you are.

I answered that in the post you quoted, that is what government agencies accept as confirmation of Aboriginality.

 

[Russell]

Then I have my answer - 1/16th it is.

I do not require any further explanations on anything else regarding this subject. Thanks.

 

[cochise]

Then I have my answer - 1/16th it is.

I do not require any further explanations on anything else regarding this subject. Thanks.

That is not the answer, the answer is the post of mine that you quoted saying you didn't have a relevant answer.

 

[Russell]

Then I have my answer - 1/16th it is.

I do not require any further explanations on anything else regarding this subject. Thanks.

That is not the answer, the answer is the post of mine that you quoted saying you didn't have a relevant answer.

Then I am at odds with that answer - however you have given your answer and I do not require further clarification. Thanks.

 

[cochise]

Then I have my answer - 1/16th it is.

I do not require any further explanations on anything else regarding this subject. Thanks.

That is not the answer, the answer is the post of mine that you quoted saying you didn't have a relevant answer.

Then I am at odds with that answer - however you have given your answer and I do not require further clarification. Thanks.

lol. it is not my answer, that is the legal definition that is accepted Australia wide.