Marcia Langton did not call all 'no' Voice voters racist and stupid

An interesting inversion of the so-called "argument", to say the least. More so given his resentment of "the description by Marcia Langton and others of 'no' voters as racist and ignorant".

Professor Langton has clarified that her well-publicised comments related not to "no" voters but to the "no" campaign.

Mr Ellery doesn't offer any substantive evidence as to the voting intentions of 70 to 80 per cent of his friends and neighbours.

The reader is also left to guess who these "others" are who would slander people who live in rural and regional Australia.

The colonisation in Australia resulted in the dispossession of First Nations people's land and the ensuing murderous brutality inflicted on their descendants.

And these people, in breathtaking forgiveness and generosity, offer the hand of friendship and commitment to fellow Australians.

I cannot understand anyone who would vote "no" to such a simple and sincere invitation.

Does Zed Seselja really think that the NSW branch of the Liberal Party would overlook candidates like Andrew Constance, Dave Sharma and others to select someone who managed the impossible in the last federal election by finishing third in a two-horse race?

Seselja is again showing that he has no regard for Canberrans.

Is his main aim simply to secure a well-paid sinecure anywhere to park his dubious talents? Well, Zed, it is not going to happen. But if it did, good riddance, I'd say.

At first reading, I wholeheartedly agreed with Stephanie Gotlib's call to end segregation in our education system ("It's time to end all types of segregation in education", October 4, p16).

Then, I stopped to reflect on my 26 years as a teacher and my son's 14 years as a student with ASD who was mainstreamed from the start.

My conclusion? Excuse the cliché, but we'd be throwing our kids - those who most need our support - out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Our system, our schools and our teachers are woefully underprepared for true integration.

Over many years as a teacher and as 'that parent', I have witnessed: teachers making fun of students in the staffroom; students with ASD being sent home repeatedly when they've cracked after being goaded by their peers and teacher; principals using learning support "points" to resource the library rather than assist students; and students with special needs being segregated behind a fence at break times.

I also know teachers who truly "get" their students and help them fly. Unfortunately, these teachers are not in the majority.

Segregation perpetuates "fear, ignorance and ableist attitudes" but integration done poorly is even more damaging.

A call to end segregation immediately terrifies me. I'm scared our government will see this as a cost-saving venture, closing "special schools" and forcing students into an environment with schools and teachers who have no idea.

Education for the educators needs to come first. We have a long way to go.

The more things change, the more they don't.

Take Australia's first referendum [on federation] and the long public campaign before it was held.

Sydney's Telegraph Mirror of April 16, 1888, shows the playbook for the then "no" campaign has marked parallels to the "no" crusade today.

Voters were being asked to say either yes or no to the proposal the colonies become states of a Commonwealth of Australia.

The Telegraph Mirror declared:

"If in doubt strike out the Yes. It is the safe thing to do; The Bill spells calamity to the colony and imposes on NSW the burdens of the smaller states; The Bill taxes every man, woman, and child £1 2s 6d a year extra. So, every man who loves his country should vote "no". Delay will give a better Federation. Strike out the "yes" and save NSW."

That advice fell on deaf ears. The "ayes" had it and our "fair go" nation was born.

If the majority vote is "no" on Saturday, October 14, I will be ashamed to be an Australian. I'm voting "yes".

Re the article about David Marr's new book Killing for Country. ("In Killing for Country, David Marr traced his family history into a dark era", October 1).

It's important for us as Australians to tell the truth about our history, which is not Cook, sheep, gold and so on.

A major part of it is the frontier wars; a long war of little engagements and terrible bloodshed.

Like Marr, I also am not guilty, but some in my family are, and I'm ashamed of these acts.

We need to face our story honestly, and we'll be the better for it.

Many countries have benefited from truth and reconciliation processes, such as Rwanda, South Africa, and the Federal Republic of Germany. Historians W E H Stanner, Lyndall Ryan, Henry Reynolds and many others show us the power of learning history.

This may help us to end the great Australian silence.

Unlike Matt Eggleston, I fail to see how allowing seismic blasting and gas extraction in a time of rapid ecological and climate decline is in the national interest ("Good reason to vote no", Letters, October 2).

The greenhouse gas pollution expected from the Scarborough Gas project is estimated to be equivalent to 15 coal power stations.

Such fossil-fuelled corporate interests are threatening our very existence.

In contrast, Indigenous Australians managed our environment and kept it in pristine condition for thousands of years.

Surely they deserve an opportunity to speak about the protection of our beautiful country?

This is one reason why I'm voting "yes" at the upcoming referendum.

You article "Pill testing hopes revived" (October 3) caused me to think about the logic of "deterrence".

The main objection to voluntary pill testing at festivals is that it is likely to make young people more inclined to take illicit drugs because they feel safer.

Critics argue more youngsters will take more drugs. We would lose the war. Some must die to save the many. Really?

I note the recent ALP conference support for the arms race and AUKUS.

The logic is that if we arm ourselves to the teeth it will deter others.

An irrational response to "fear" underscores both the "drug war" and the preparation for war with China.

The only way to save life is to act to actually do so and abandon nonsense logic and abandon the "drug war", the developing "cold war" and the looming "hot war".

Greg Adamson, a teacher, (Letters, October 3) is clear why he will be voting "no". He also made it clear he has little understanding of the difference between equality and equity.

Equality means everyone is given the same resources or opportunities. Equity recognises that everyone is not the same and some may need more resources and assistance.

Teachers especially are faced with this everyday in their classes. And parents expect that the individual needs of their child will be met so they can achieve. In schools it is referred to as social justice.

Greg wouldn't claim every child he teaches is the same and none are entitled to extra help. Groups of people may also need services and policies adapted to meet their unique needs. That's why I will be voting "yes".

Our federal government has approved four new coal mines since May last year as well as $1.5 billion subsidy to facilitate the expansion of the gas industry in the Northern Territory.

In The Conversation on October 2 Judith Brett noted the findings of the climate and security risk analysis have not been released. Brett says we can make a "shrewd guess" as to why.

As attention turns to bushfire risk, one has to wonder when we will have a more thoughtful appreciation of the way we have laid the foundations of this disaster.

How can we persuade our government to go to the root cause and to stop further coal and gas mining developments immediately?