Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Feb 6, 2010 21:44:14 GMT -6
S:reu Tzaracomprada ?
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 7, 2010 22:13:11 GMT -6
The Superbowl's now over, so maybe we should just move on to the next question.
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Feb 8, 2010 19:36:35 GMT -6
LOL. Thank you for this interesting question Senator. Well, I will leave it to what my sister said as a former resident of Louisiana..."I am going to celebrate this victory at Disney World." I don't follow football so I couldn't say who I thought would've won but I and a significant portion of my family were overjoyed at the Saints victory.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Feb 8, 2010 22:26:44 GMT -6
Next question :
"You are required to replace one Article or Covenant in the OrgLaw. Which one, and why? (No fair saying "none", btw. ) You have 500 words.
S:reu Tzaracomprada, you are up first.
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Feb 9, 2010 20:37:26 GMT -6
There are changes that I would make to some articles of the Organic Law, particularly Article XII describing the makeup of the Cabinet, but for the purposes of this debate inquiry I will focus on the Covenants of Rights and Freedoms. Generally, I have always worried about the carving out of "negative rights" within the scope of natural human rights which no government has the right to circumscribe which the OrgLaw handles nicely with the Seventeenth Covenant but alas there is still the Sixteenth...
I would eliminate the underlined part of the language in the Sixteenth Covenant:
Talossan citizenship can only be lost by a citizen's voluntary renunciation of citizenship, or as punishment for a crime determined by the Uppermost Cort.
One reason is the similarity between the civil death strictures concerning ex-felons in some American states and a few other nations and the right of any government body in Talossa to also "punish" a citizen for confirmed wrong-doing by eliminating their citizenship. And that is but one unfortunate example. Once legitimately earned, how is it the role of any Talossan governmental authority to determine an individual's potential ability to be "civilly redeemed"?
While I wholeheartedly affirm the jurisprudential abilities of our current esteemed Justices I also worry that this should not be within the array of choices that the Uppermost Cort is allowed to consider upon the need to punish a citizen.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Feb 9, 2010 22:08:09 GMT -6
S:reu Davis , you have the floor.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 10, 2010 0:16:42 GMT -6
Thirteenth Covenant. Liberty consists of any action which is not detrimental to others, and no right herein enumerated, or elsewhere recognised by the Cosâ, shall extend to anyone engaged in activities which injure, endanger, risk or compromise the physical health, privacy, or tranquility of other persons through the pretended exercise of said right.
We should never have pretended to be able to stop people from disturbing the tranquility of others. That section of this Covenant should be clipped right out of the OrgLaw. It's a fairly simple excision that doesn't require much explanation - we have freedom of expression, and my expression may violate your tranquility. And my right to do so must be protected from such a contradictory portion of the OrgLaw.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Feb 10, 2010 0:53:58 GMT -6
Now, on to the second part.
S:reu Tzaracomprada - Please defend against S:reu Davis's stance.
Now, here's the rub - even if you agree with him, play the Devil's Advocate - and argue why the changes should not be made.
S:reu Davis - the same will go for you.
You both have 250 words to make your stance.
And there will be follow-up questions.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 12, 2010 12:51:13 GMT -6
There's only about a month left before the election; maybe this could be the final exchange?
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Feb 12, 2010 20:43:25 GMT -6
LOL. I salute your humor, S:reu Davis.
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Feb 12, 2010 21:06:04 GMT -6
Perhaps it is good that the highest law in our Realm makes an attempt at defining liberty and then emphasizing that the rights set forth in the other Covenants do not protect a Talossan who infringes upon the liberty of another. Governments can not be expected to solve all of our problems but it is indeed admirable when a Government seeks to define liberty in the most broad terms possible thereby respecting the autonomy of its constituents. While that same Government can not protect each and every one Talossan from one another it can work to set the terms within which we might redress individual infringements of liberty.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Feb 12, 2010 22:18:03 GMT -6
S:reu Davis- Please defend against S:reu Tzaracomprada on his original stance.
==========================================================
After that, if there are no objections, I would like each candidate to provide a final closing statement for this debate in whole, not just this final question. I ask that you limit your final statement to 250 words.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 13, 2010 10:33:56 GMT -6
It seems to me that in a voluntary nation like our own, which operates on extracurricular time thanks to our small size, we have taken particular pains with our citizenry. We choose who can enter carefully, and we regulate their behavior. And when citizenship can be renounced by not voting three times, it doesn't seem as though we should say that it cannot be renounced by the most heinous of crimes. The Cort should retain their discretion.
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Feb 15, 2010 21:53:06 GMT -6
I thank Senator Preston for his excellent service as debate moderator and as interim Senator for our province.
I thank S:reu Davis for his wonderful dialog within this debate and look forward to the remaining month we have in the campaign.
If the people who have followed this debate seek a summary, a closing statement, then I ask that they review my words throughout this weeks long exchange between S:reu Davis and I. It encapsulates the differences between our visions for the province and on important issues of national import.
In the meantime, stay focused on the Tzaracomprada campaign page for the soon forthcoming Agenda for Maritiimi-Maxhestic.
In Solidarity, Breneir
Edited: Spelling.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 15, 2010 22:07:35 GMT -6
What a great debate! Big thanks to Senator Preston, of course, and to my compatriot-in-province, MC Tzaracomprada.
I like to think this debate has shown both the MC and myself in a good light. I think it has demonstrated the value of experience and knowledge of the province and the law in a Senator, and it has shown MC Tzaracomprada's enthusiasm and good nature. I hope to work with him in the Ziu in the future, no matter what may happen.
Areivi!
|
|