Australia may soon change its constitution to establish something to be known as "an indigenous voice to parliament", though no one has stated clearly what that would concretely mean.

In general, it is wrong to establish rights or privileges for citizens based on their racial background. Would this "voice" do a thing? Without a concrete plan, we can't tell.

Prime Minister Albanese has promised to state simply and clearly the text for the referendum to decide on the plan. Supposing that the simple and clear text also states concretely what would be done, then depending on those details, it might perhaps be a good thing.

The indigenous Australians suffered a grave wrong when the British colonists took their land, and suffer from direct and systemic racism today. They deserve various sorts of help and compensation — but that is a different question.

*Fears that Egypt may use Cop27 to whitewash human rights abuses.*

*IVF may be in jeopardy in states where embryos are granted person hood.*

I think that artificial assistance to getting pregnant is ok in theory, but terribly self-destructive to a society in our present situation.

The ancient Middle East understood the need to cancel debts periodically, so that the rich did not drive the rest into bondage.

Nowadays, by contrast, the creditors rule and government believes it exists to make sure that debts are not forgiven.

Some former Republicans are campaigning against trump-pets and for preserving democracy.