Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - Printable Version +- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz) +-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html) +--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html) +---- Forum: Fudgetopia Hall of Government (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-12.html) +----- Forum: Assembly of the South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-91.html) +----- Thread: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles (/thread-608.html) |
Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - Belschaft - 06-11-2014 I would like to propose the following as a new Article One of the Charter; Quote:Article One - Fundemental Ideals and Principles It does exactly what it says on the tin; lays out certain principles and ideals that are at the heart of the Coalition, and proclaims them immutable. I draw special attention to Clause 6, that would prohibit the region from adopting either a Defender or Raider identity. It renders us formally independent from R/D, and hopefully will banish forever this tedious argument. RE: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - Farengeto - 06-11-2014 Anything to end this futile and nonsensical argument. RE: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - Awe - 06-11-2014 Is there a difference between this and the BoR? RE: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - Belschaft - 06-11-2014 Yes. The BoR grants individual and specific rights - ie; speech, fair trial, etc - whilst this identifies broad founding principles. Democracy, liberty, equality, tolerance, independence. RE: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - Awe - 06-11-2014 Can we just change all instances of the word "magistrate(s)" to "official(s)" for the sake of consistency across the laws? Other than that I don't really see an issue with this Bill. RE: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - Belschaft - 06-12-2014 Sure. RE: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - sandaoguo - 06-12-2014 Democracy, liberty, equality, and tolerance, all good things. But I do not subscribe to "Independence" and the Charter should not be used to force me, nor anybody else, to do so if they want to participate in regional government. What you propose is no different than what you damn Osiris and Lazarus for doing. Furthermore, this would render all treaties and diplomatic relations null and void, and prohibit them for as long as this Charter amendment would stand. RE: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - Belschaft - 06-12-2014 Reworded clause six to prevent any possible reading along those lines. RE: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - sandaoguo - 06-12-2014 People running in elections would not be allowed to proclaim any position in NS Gameplay aside from "Independence," because all elected officials would be banned from pursuing defender, raider, or imperialist ambitions anyways. It forces an ideology upon anybody who wants to run for office, no matter how many times you vehemently deny that Independence is an ideology. It would declare all of our treaties null and void, because TSP would be banned from doing anything that creates an "allegiance or alignment." Every single one of our treaties creates an allegiance. Every one our treaties with a non-neutral region forces an alignment. Though I suspect you would argue that, for example, the TSP-TNI treaty doesn't do anything of the sort. You would be wrong, but there's no objective way to determine that. So it would be up to the "Independent" members of the Cabinet and the courts to determine when a treaty creates an alignment, and their decision would no doubt be based on their political alignment. RE: Charter Ammendment - Ideals and Principles - Belschaft - 06-12-2014 As I said, I've reworded it to prevent any such interpretations. It specifically prohibits a "prescribed military ideology or alignment", and prevents officials from introducing one on the sly. The region could not become raider, nor the MoA turn the SPSF into a de-facto raider force. The objective is to put this issue out to pasture, and make it explicitly clear that this region is neither raider or defender, so we can all move on and deal with more important things. |