On RZ3

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Esteemed MCs, I speak here only in my private capacity as an MC and not on behalf of the Free Democrats.

I would like to announce that I intend to abstain on RZ3 - unless some Talossan is prepared to put their money where their mouth is by making a solemn promise that, if this bill is passed, they will go to the national territory, commit an act of civil disobedience re: cannabis prohibition, and publish photographic evidence thereof. (Such evidence should of course not be published on a public board, because I don't want to pick a fight with law enforcement of the Cestour State of Wisconsin.)

Esteemed MCs, passing a bill like this costs nothing, and that's precisely why I won't vote for it though I endorse cannabis decriminalization in theory. There is Talossan precedent. This Ziu annexed the Milwaukee suburbs of Shorewood and Whitefish Bay, north of the GTA, more than once. And yet, as the official histories point out, "photographic evidence of the annexation was never provided so the annexation never became effective."

Talossan sovereignty means nothing unless it is asserted. Who is prepared to actually make RZ3 mean something in practice?

[Ian Plätschisch]

Esteemed MCs,

For what purpose is our claim to sovereignty if we are always bound to follow the laws of Wisconsin? No, we don't have a way to actually enforce our criminal law, but if we claim to have jurisdiction, it is proper for us to make criminal law how we see fit.

I will also point out the precedent for making Talossan law which contradicted Wisconsin law without a way to enforce it. 32RZ25, passed in March 2004, officially legalized same-sex marriages in Talossa, more than a decade before they became legal in Wisconsin (on October 6, 2014 according to Wikipedia). During that decade, did any Talossans participate in a same-sex wedding in Talossa? To my knowledge, no, but I also don't think anyone said the law was never "effective."

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Nov 1, 2017 19:33:06 GMT -6 Ian Plätschisch said:

Esteemed MCs,

For what purpose is our claim to sovereignty if we are always bound to follow the laws of Wisconsin? No, we don't have a way to actually enforce our criminal law, but if we claim to have jurisdiction, it is proper for us to make criminal law how we see fit.

I will also point out the precedent for making Talossan law which contradicted Wisconsin law without a way to enforce it. 32RZ25, passed in March 2004, officially legalized same-sex marriages in Talossa, more than a decade before they became legal in Wisconsin (on October 6, 2014 according to Wikipedia). During that decade, did any Talossans participate in a same-sex wedding in Talossa? To my knowledge, no, but I also don't think anyone said the law was never "effective."

I can only say that that was a horrible oversight. I would totally have volunteered to get married under Talossan law on Talossan territory, if I weren't already married, and if airfares weren't prohibitive.

I say again: I am suggesting that if someone doesn't go to our home territory and light up a big fatty-boombatty blunt, then we are de facto admitting to Cestoûr sovereignty, which is, as the Jewish people say, a schande far de goyim.

[Ian Plätschisch]

Nov 2, 2017 15:23:46 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

I say again: I am suggesting that if someone doesn't go to our home territory and light up a big fatty-boombatty blunt, then we are de facto admitting to Cestoûr sovereignty, which is, as the Jewish people say, a schande far de goyim.

We would not be admitting to Cestoûr sovereignty.  I specifically mention in the bill that recreational marijuana is bad for health, so if no one smoked, that would be a reflection of healthy living.

[Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM.]

There's a certain injunctive order of the CpI by which I have been prevented from voting on the same (and hence on my own volition I'd rather not participate in discussions regarding the same).

[Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun]

You cannot enjoin yourself from doing something, you moron.

[Ián Tamorán S.H.]

For your information, I believe that there is a further statement from the Cort on this matter.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

The Senator from Benito (I think) said elsewhere:

Nov 21, 2017 6:00:26 GMT -6 Sir C. M. Siervicül said:

Lest the 1st Clark of the term go entirely without discussion in this body, I rise to make an observation regarding RZ3, and the discussion of that bill that has taken place in the other chamber of the Ziu. We are very fortunate, I think, that no one argued for Dame Miestra's theory of the assertion of Talossan sovereignty in defiance of Wisconsin law back when Talossa incorporated a right to euthanasia and attempted suicide into the Covenants of Rights and Freedoms.

The Covenant of Rights and Freedoms is miéida da toro. It is Ben Madison's personal political prejudices written into law and I would prefer to have it repealed. There's a ban on "affirmative action" (i.e. never doing anything to correct white-cishet-male privilege), for the sake of Allà. While I am cautiously in favour of "right to die", I would have made the same argument back then.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

I should also note that my stand is 100% in line with ancient Talossan history. King Robert I used to bring home liqueur-filled chocolates from Europe, which were at that point illegal under US/Wisconsin law, to assert Talossan sovereignty. Our sovereignty must be asserted, ladies and gentlemen, else we are just jerking off here.