I still massively prefer the version I seconded. I don't think it really comes down to "degrees," because there are different goals being sought here.

My concern is that the Assembly isn't telling people that they're not allowed to advocate for something, or that one position is the only acceptable and reasonable position. I want people to be able to advocate for TSP being defender, and I want people to advocate for the opposite. In other words, I want TSP to remain a democracy with freedom of expression, and not have the Charter abused to silence ideas some people don't like.

Saying that TSP "shall make no law respecting an establishment of political or military alignment or ideology" is less preferable than saying we are open to all political and military alignments and ideologies. Again, it's a positive vs. negative issue. But it's better than saying that TSP rejects altogether people advocating for a political or military alignment or ideology. It would prevent somebody from pushing for a law defining TSP as a defender/raider/imperialist/Independent region, while allowing people to advocate defender/raider/imperialist/Independent policies in government.

So, if people prefer that over the version that's already been seconded three times, then okay, that's the next best option. But I still favor the other version.