[Citizens Toolbox] [Immigration] |
| No Running elections |
Parent message | ||||
| Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu | November 03, 2005 - 13:20 | |||
| My peculiarist objections to your derivatist opinions.(#23359), posted by Üc Tärfâ, [IP Hidden], November 03, 2005 - 15:55. Viewed 118 times. |
| User Info | Text |
| Üc Tärfâ Group: citizens (1365 posts total) (last post: March 10, 2008 - 08:29) Citizen #28: Ugo Truffelli | >how the institution af a Talossan Marriage could assure people to not being >discriminated more than the Constitution does? As far i've understood we have different views on the topic "discrimination". My thought is if marriage is not defined, as we don't need to define it [see below], how can a person been discriminated on the basis of his "marriage" orientations?. Simply he can't. I can't discriminate Assurbanipal (invented person) if he pratics plural marriages. I don't agree with him, but i can't discriminate him. Instead if you try to legalize plural marriages, i have to make an opposition to this law, because i don't accept it. This may lead to two different scenarios: a) The majority agrees with me: you are discriminated. b) The majority agrees with you: I am discriminated, seen as a "enemy of the progress". In both cases someone is discriminated by the majority dictatorship as defined by Tocqueville. The problem is that a law defining marriage is not needed [see below], it's not urgent, but it may cause discriminations and problems, because neither you nor I could impose our views on others. (If you think sthing right, it doesn't mean that it's the right). From my point of view such a law it's unecessary cause of discriminations and qaurrels. You believe such law could prevent discriminations, I believe instead that it could be the cause of the discriminations you want to prevent. Discriminations that are not present in Talossa nowadays. Are same sex marriages legal? Are plural marriages legal? If marriage it's not defined in Talossa, how someone could put these question to himself? >And how Talossa could effectively grant maritial status to its citizen?> You forget something: we are not a nation like any other around the world. Our "marriage" will not be recognised by other nations, Talossan citizenship it's not recognised by other nations, we don't have people actually living in Talossa, etc... Our basis are fictitious, and everything we do is fictitious. And what Talossa could gain? If you think it's inevitable, doesn't mean that is inevitable. However, you didn't answered me: what Talossa could gain? >Your law could generate a scenario where two people are single for the entire >world, but married for Talossa. We have to escape from this horrible scenario, son of a Macro or >Game fanatism. Because we are not a nation like any other nation in the world! We are not a "nation", but a micronation, a nationette. Our situation is different. >Because we are a micronation that exists solely on the internet composed of people from many >different cultures that may never meet eachother and, most importantly, we do not have lands >or >international recognition. I've never wanted an international recognition by Macronations. The aim to be recongised by other nations and by UN it's an hysteria, a micronational fanatism that was never part of Talossa. I take Talossa very seriuosly, even if i don't want a day to have written on my European Passport: "European and Talossa citizen". ____________________________ MRP Spokesman / Dûceu dels mocts dal MRP my talossán personal page. Visitetz Cézembre dürånt el otogñheu.  e-mail: ugo.truffelli AT libero.it |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|