[Talossa.com portal]
[Citizens Toolbox]
[Immigration]
No Running elections

Parent message
Üc TärfâNovember 03, 2005 - 15:55
RE: My peculiarist objections to your derivatist opinions.(#23389), posted by Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu, [IP Hidden], November 04, 2005 - 11:02. Viewed 125 times.
User InfoText
Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu
Group: citizens
(847 posts total)
(last post: March 12, 2008 - 12:13)
Citizen #33:
James O'Neill

Why I am here...

I have done a bit of research on micronations and I choose Talossa because I see so much promise and possibility here. I find it quite disenheartenting that some do not see it or do not want to embrace it. I have not chosen other micronations due to the chosen government types being monarchies. Monarchies have been dying and unsuccesful for a long time. I have not chosen some due there being an official religion. I have not chosen others because their website has not been updated in a long time which shows lack of activity or participation. All of these things say to me there is a lack of seriousness in their creators and thier citizens.

I have found a level of seriousness here and that is why I am here. Because I see that you are serious and because I think that we can make a difference in the world and we can make life better for our citizens. If you do not believe this then it will never have a chance to come true. We should strive for the best that we can, not only for ourselves but for our macronational communities. Talossa can rock the world and set it up on its ears, but only if you want it to....

Our basis are fictitious, and everything we do is fictitious.

May be I want more for Talossa than some are thinking, but by not reaching for the stars you will never know how far Talossa could possibly go. I know that international recognition is not a big issue for most likely everyone here. It is not something that is necessarily being actively pursued or even reasearched. To not put ourselves in the best position possible lacks vision. To not put ourselves in the best position possible for macronational or even micronational interactions is like trainining for years and years for a big race and then once you get there to decide to go get a hamburger instead (of participating in the race). You will be working for the sake of working....

Please forgive this. I have been inspried by Talossa and what you have shown me. I have been here for about a week and I'm already getting feisty...Maybe I am a little out of line...

Marriage

marriage orientations I like that phrase...

I am have been stunned by the fact that some have a reason to not define marriage. I think the primary problem people have a marriage law is the possibility that the government telling me who I can and cannot marry when it is, infact, a very personal choice. I am proposing a law that specificly says that a citizen may marry who and how many people they want to ensure the fact so that there are not questions.

In what way would a law defining marriage be imposing our view on others if it includes all of the marital combinations. Who would be the ones that are descriminated against? Can you show me a way in which a legal definition of marriage as I have proposed could result in descrimination?

Marital questions will be asked by virtue of a defintion not being there. Is this type of marriage recognized or acceptable, or is it not? People that are researching Talossa will want to know, as that is a very important issue to very many people. Not defining a law may make it harder for people to decide to become a citizen, as it will be harder to see where Talossa stands without reading the subtle implications of our constitution. People will not spend a lot of time reasearching this.

Other countries (macro or not) that wish to have diplomatic relations with us will want to know where we stand. If we do become bigger and we want to help our citizens that have issues in their macronational communities with their choice in their marital orientation, the fact that their union is recognized by Talossa will make a difference. I am not saying that this will happen now, but maybe sometime in the future. Explicit governmental recognition that our citizens have an choice and it should not be limited by governmental regulation will be very important to many, many people.

What will we gain from a legal definition of marriage? We, as a country, will state without a doubt to all who are interested, citizens or not, what types of marriages are acceptable in Talossa, and that will be whatever type of marriage that a citizen wants. We will be showing that a marriage is special relationship that is the backbone of society that deserves protection and special consideration in the eyes of the law. A marriage is not just a friendship, it is not just a work relationship, it is not a contract to do work for someone, it is something more. We will give those that do not have a religious preference or are anti-religious a method of having a union. In a way, by not having a law we are descriminating against these people.


RE: My peculiarist objections to your derivatist opinions.Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuNovember 04, 2005 - 11:02
Üc TärfâNovember 04, 2005 - 12:00
la garçâ malpadertNovember 04, 2005 - 20:09
Üc TärfâNovember 05, 2005 - 09:24
la garçâ malpadertNovember 05, 2005 - 20:18
Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuNovember 04, 2005 - 12:16
Üc TärfâNovember 04, 2005 - 12:26
Reply to this post | Back to the forum | Forums Overview| Activate Thread View
Forums Overview | Login | Register | Lost your password? Cyphor (Release: 0.19, PHP 5.2.5)