[Talossa.com portal]
[Citizens Toolbox]
[Immigration]
No Running elections
Parent message
Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuNovember 04, 2005 - 11:02
RE: My peculiarist objections to your derivatist opinions.(#23392), posted by Üc Tärfâ, [IP Hidden], November 04, 2005 - 12:00. Viewed 130 times.
User InfoText
Üc Tärfâ
Group: citizens
(1365 posts total)
(last post: March 10, 2008 - 08:29)
Citizen #28:
Ugo Truffelli		First of all, i want to make clear that i don't want to argue, but only to have a civil change of thoughts whith who is interested. It doesn't matter if we agree or not, the important is to know what others believes and what others think. And why they agree or disagree. I'm very happy that you and others are (or will be) citizens because even if we will be opponents in issues, the presence of this opposition is vital to Talossa. We need different point of views.

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.



In this I strongly agree with you. Probably we have different views on in which world we can make the difference, and what is this difference we're talking about. Anyway, I strongly believe that Talossa it's a (peculiar) unique experiment: it's not simply a community of friend exchanging political opinions, nor a micronaziún. Talossa it's something different from those. We can make the difference in the micronationl world, and we can easily become a "working workshop". Maybe in the future Talossa will be a Republic with more than hundred Citizens, but i don't believe that it should become a mäcronaziún.

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..


Again, no objections. But how shall we strive ourselves? And what we really need? Probably my answers are in part different from yours, probably we have two different paths on which we want to see Talossa walks; even if some objectives are similar. Maybe our paths will meet sometimes, nad maybe sometimes we will work together until we will find a new crossroads where our paths will go in different directions again.

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.



Talossa it's a living nation: it knows how far it can go not immediatly, but living, conducting its business and finding out new possibility, new ways, new raisons d'être. Talossa know how far it can go but it citizens don't know how far, however they are convincted on which paths thay want to walk, and that this farthest point will become more and more defined each days.

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.



The problem it's not how many liberties your law gives to a citizen in marrying who (adn how may) he wants. The problem is that most of us doesn't find the necessity to have such a law. Apart our own conceptions of marriage, we don't find that Talossa needs a definition of marriages, and we don't find that Talossa needs to be able to marry 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.


Here our paths have a completly opposite direction. Not defining a law, we don't have suac a law that needs to be defined; may make it harder for people to decide to become a citizen marriage is not, and will not be, an important reason that stands behind Talossan Citizenship. People will not spend a lot of time reasearching this

Const SAY what Talossa is, every citizens must know it (not by hearth, not each article, but know).

help our citizens that have issues in their macronational communities with their choice in their marital orientation,



I don't want this role for Talossa.

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,



It's still the same point. As most of us don't want a "Talossa marriage", we don't see the need to "state what types of marriages will be acceptable in Talossa", because Talossa doesn't marry anyone.

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.


This kind of showing doesn't belong to Talossan institution.

In a way, by not having a law we are descriminating against these people.



Sorry, but i can't see how having a law which defines marriages, could prevent discrimination against people. I can't see the reason of this discrmination.
____________________________
MRP Spokesman / Dûceu dels mocts dal MRP
my talossán personal page.
Visitetz Cézembre dürånt el otogñheu.

e-mail: ugo.truffelli AT libero.it
RE: My peculiarist objections to your derivatist opinions.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)