|
Post by Evan Campbell on Jan 27, 2006 18:14:01 GMT -6
and as always the US kept a promise annd the Chinese are going to respect that.
|
|
|
Post by Ups Antônio Martüc on Jan 27, 2006 18:40:06 GMT -6
the us didn't take iraq that fast tho.. they kinda took their time.
|
|
Prince Patrick
Citizen since 8-23-2005; Prince since 3-14-2007; Duke since 8-6-2011
Citizen and Governor of Florencia; His Highness, Prince Patrick, Duke of Florencia
Posts: 208
Duke Since: 8-6-2011
|
Post by Prince Patrick on Jan 28, 2006 12:27:01 GMT -6
Personally, I find the title to be particularly offensive. If we have an official national food and it is a real food, a national animal that is real, and a national beverage that is a real beveragel; I find it absurd that we would take one of the most important aspects of humanity so lightly. Whether one is offended by the title or not, the title itself is offensive. It is esentially making fun of, not only the Orthodox, but every Church. If we were to have a national religion, perhaps it ought to be a real one. At this point, my suggestion would be that we "throw out" that part of the King's title, and make Talossa a religiously free state. In lieu of that extreme, we ought to make the national church a real church, and those of us who practice some other religion can continue doing so illegally. I would have no problem with disobeying the national religion, but I do have a problem with mocking the idea of religion in general. We are all here to have fun, let us do so as good Talossans should, with moderate respect. Respectfully, Patrick Woolley
|
|
|
Post by Ups Antônio Martüc on Jan 28, 2006 12:31:05 GMT -6
hmm. I like your idea of seperation of church and state.. But a national religion? No. Freedom of religion! I applied to the "brianism" yahoo board because I might convert...But I was never accepted hmm...Who is brian anyway?
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Walkland on Jan 28, 2006 12:51:28 GMT -6
I presume everyone in here knows about dover? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4547734.stm)
Well, Mr. Bobby Henderson Started Up FSMism, And Is All In The Fight Against ID in schools.
I Don't Know If You Know About This, Its More Popular In The States Then In England.
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Walkland on Jan 28, 2006 12:52:20 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Ups Antônio Martüc on Jan 28, 2006 12:54:31 GMT -6
Why fight ID's? It's good to have identification.
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Walkland on Jan 28, 2006 13:45:26 GMT -6
If you are joking, lol
If you are not, ID stands for Intellegunt Desing
|
|
|
Post by Nigel Cornes on Jan 29, 2006 18:46:49 GMT -6
Personally, I find the title to be particularly offensive. If we have an official national food and it is a real food, a national animal that is real, and a national beverage that is a real beveragel; I find it absurd that we would take one of the most important aspects of humanity so lightly. Whether one is offended by the title or not, the title itself is offensive. It is esentially making fun of, not only the Orthodox, but every Church. If we were to have a national religion, perhaps it ought to be a real one. At this point, my suggestion would be that we "throw out" that part of the King's title, and make Talossa a religiously free state. In lieu of that extreme, we ought to make the national church a real church, and those of us who practice some other religion can continue doing so illegally. I would have no problem with disobeying the national religion, but I do have a problem with mocking the idea of religion in general. We are all here to have fun, let us do so as good Talossans should, with moderate respect. Respectfully, Patrick Woolley At first I was going to argue that the title potentially represents Talossa's paradoxical relationship with "the rest of the world," for lack of a better term, but I agree with this statement. I'm definitely more in favor of a secularist Talossa that lends respect to any religious creed. Great point.
|
|
|
Post by Ups Antônio Martüc on Feb 1, 2006 1:24:39 GMT -6
I think that as a nation in the modern era we need to be blind to religious faith and for our monarchy to thrive into the 21st century. It is my opinion that religion should play no part in the functions of state and that it should be merely up to the individual of said religion to follow his or hers own faith accrordingly and that it is of no concern to the government. As we see in the past, millions and millions have died over religious faith and the kingdoms of the old are done for in this modern era we live in today. The british monarchy survives into the 21st century because it allows its elected government to make the decisions even though the monarchy over there could do what they will. I think as time goes by, a monarchy is either taken out by revolution (i.e. the french revolution) or it is passified and allows its elected government to make the decisions. I think the monarchy of britain is a symbol of the british empire with its queen as a figurehead. They respect religious faith out there and you can be anything you want, even though the monarchy still does mention christianity within its routines and that's just apart of its history. I think it would be great if the Talossan monarchy could seperate itself from religion, I think that's a move forward into the 21st century as many potential Talossan citizens might be of other faiths and if they see that Talossa will let them worship the way they want, they will be ALOT more interested in it. That's just my take on it, I don't mean to offend anyone or the monarchy by my opinions.
I myself am sort of an Atheist. I don't believe in any god, but I do believe in the existence of ghosts and orbs as i've seen some in the past. I heard the theory that when you die, your energy cannot be destroyed.... It just leaves your body. What is this "brianism" I hear about?
And yes, I believe in the theories of Charles Darwin.
|
|
Tric'hard Dïeulofaçeva
Citizen since 2-15-2006
Talossan, Deputy Immigration Minister, College of Arms Intern, and DOTTer
Posts: 76
|
Post by Tric'hard Dïeulofaçeva on Feb 2, 2006 16:19:50 GMT -6
Wel the intresting question on a official Talossan religion is quite a debated one and I feel it neccesary that if we do put up a national religion it should at east be by part of the people and of a real faith. Religious freedom is well enough but a unified religion can bring a national tie to the nation as a whole all over the world. You make take the Islamic religion for an example; it, with all its many differences have the ability to rally when needed because of the key aspect of religion in is basically a more serious and strong mutual pact between nations of the same religion. So if you would like Talossa to have a mutual pact with other nations, then by all means make a national religion.
|
|
|
Post by Ups Antônio Martüc on Feb 2, 2006 20:20:03 GMT -6
We agree to disagree. I don't believe there should be a national sponsored religion as I believe that it would be bias to all the other religions, and you think the opposite. That's fine. I just think that if let's say muslims saw that you have the freedom of belief in Talossa and that it's secular religiously that they would be more tempted to join. If they saw that it has like say a Talossan orthodox church or something then they will probably not join as it differs with their religious beliefs. They might just be deterred to join. I believe in freedom of belief fully that is in no way sponsored by the government. That's what freedom of belief and seperation of church and state means to me.
|
|
Tric'hard Dïeulofaçeva
Citizen since 2-15-2006
Talossan, Deputy Immigration Minister, College of Arms Intern, and DOTTer
Posts: 76
|
Post by Tric'hard Dïeulofaçeva on Feb 2, 2006 20:26:44 GMT -6
Well I disagree because look at the US, its religious freedom hasn't helped them at all with the Islamic and it may be worse than Christian or Buddhist based countries. The Islamic people and countries with a national religion I believe respect each other because of their common goal not like the US and thats what would happen to us if we go into religious freedom.
|
|
|
Post by Ups Antônio Martüc on Feb 2, 2006 20:34:36 GMT -6
Actually the USA is founded on judaeo-christianity. Talossa will always be founded on christianity, but the question is:
Do we need a state sponsored religion? My answer is no.
|
|
|
Post by Joel Wood on Feb 2, 2006 21:55:46 GMT -6
The debate as I understand this, isn't whether we want a state sponsored faith but whether we want one that can be seen as biased against a "real" faith. Talossans who do not put much stock in fatih or spirituality should find nothing offensive with this Act, it's itent is to accomodate the Talossans who do.
|
|