Post by Nic Casálmac'h on Mar 9, 2007 18:43:58 GMT -6
mick said:
OK then...We take everyone who DOESN'T want to be king, and have them write a 50 word response of why they should NOT be king, and we vote for the one who doesn't want it the worst? err... best? ...least?
That would leave us in a bit of a quandary. Then we could also end up with whoever was best at lying as king.
castiglha said:
How boring it is when everyone is civil about opposing points of view.:-)
I presume you think boring is a good thing. [Translation of the above statement: How boring it is when everyone actually sticks to the point of the matter instead of throwing around random accusations and impolite words.]
danlorentz said:
--Your "grace of God" comment reveals you to be a disciple of the watery tart divine-right-of- Kings-to-rule school of thought. Most definitely not! It just shows that there are two problems here: firstly, I cannot express myself clearly; and secondly, I am too wrapped up in my own ideological fantasies (or in other words I live in my world, as my mom once said).
I think this is just one of those cases where we must agree to disagree. You think we need a way out of hereditary succession. I think we need to avoid such controversies as might arise over who has claim to the throne, especially in cases of uncertainty; in addition we would then have an heir preparing himself for the throne, hopefully being guided by all the wise to develop abilities that would make him a good king.
Now--since there are no legislators of more years and wisdom than I telling me to shut up--I shall take the liberty of telling myself.