By my understanding: The Racial Discrimination Act (RDA), passed in …

Comment on Will we better understand the ‘Recognise’ referendum than we did the 1967 one? by Evelyne Roullet.

By my understanding: The Racial Discrimination Act (RDA), passed in 1975, seeks to promote equality before the law for all persons and implements the principle of prohibiting discrimination against people on the basis of their race, colour, or national or ethnic origin.
The broad and general prohibition of discrimination in section 9 of the RDA is accompanied by specific prohibitions of discrimination in a number of areas of public life:–
• access to places and facilities;
• land, housing and other accommodation;
• provision of goods and services;
• the right to join trade unions; and
• employment.
Without the third option “prohibit racial discrimination by any government in Australia – unless the discrimination is intended: to overcome disadvantage, to reduce the adverse impact of racial discrimination in the past, or to protect culture, language or heritage”, the following will not be any longer permitted:
• Priority for employment is given to Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander applicants.
• You only need to complete this section if you are of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent.
• Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Applicant.
• If you are both of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander descent, please tick both boxes.
(An Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander is a person of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent, who identifies as such and is accepted as such by the community with which he or she lives) and all places facilities and institutions being schools, health organisations, hostels, etc … will become available to all.

Recent Comments by Evelyne Roullet

Warrant for police search of construction firm office
@ Concerned Citizen: Furphy? Does it mean the police is gossiping?


NT cost of living $1700 a week
How many earn $1700 a week?


You can vote No with love: Alice priest
Sue, I have respect for homosexuals who come in the open (I have some in my family and a lot of friends).
But we talking only of equality for heterosexuality and homosexuality. In this case why ignoring bisexuality?
To be a heterosexual man or woman means having a personally significant and meaningful romantic and/or sexual attraction primarily to adults of the opposite sex.
To be a homosexual man or woman means having a personally significant and meaningful romantic and/or sexual attraction primarily to adults of the same sex
To be a bisexual man or woman means having a personally significant and meaningful romantic and/or sexual attraction to both adult males and females, equally attracted to both sexes.
Can we have a legal bounding marriage of three people?


You can vote No with love: Alice priest
To my knowledge, all Australian Federal and State Parliaments and Legislative Assemblies open in prayer – with most using the Lord’s Prayer Ergo Australia is a Christian country.
If the law of marriage is to be changed so the Australian Constitution
Australia’s legal system and institutions, while being secular in nature, also draw heavily on Christian ethics and morality, best illustrated by the 10 commandments and the fact that, for years, it was customary for those involved in trials to swear on the Bible.
The constitution and other laws and policies protect religious freedom and, in practice, the government generally enforced these protections.
However the major religions of Australia : Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Taoism condemned homosexuality
I think our politicians should first change Constitution and subsequent laws instead of wasting tax payer’s money on a referendum.
We have the Yes and the No who are disturbing our peace. We should may be taking model on the The 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen which is considered by legal authorities to have equal legal standing with the Constitution of France, which states: “No one may be questioned about his opinions, [and the] same [for] religious [opinions], provided that their manifestation does not trouble the public order established by the law.”


You can vote No with love: Alice priest
Bruce: The argument that “every other western country has embraced SSM so jump on board” is similar to the argument teenagers use on their parents. However a good parent will answer: You are not everybody else.


Be Sociable, Share!