torc
Full Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by torc on Dec 19, 2005 12:49:15 GMT -5
I want to do something that probably should have been done with the Presidential races.
COL is a very important position in this region, and I feel that with so many people running for the office, it is only fair that we give the electorate a sensable knowledge of who is running. I, like most of the candidates, did not hae enough time to significantly outreach, unless you think a few posts here and there is enough. Thus I officially challenge all my opponent for COL to a debate, or more of a philosophy discussion. I hope this will reveal who everyone is, in what do we beleieve, and how we would perfom our duties. I trust we, as civilized Christians, will all keep it fair and loving and absolutely no mud-slinging, no matter how easy and fun it might look. We have to hold ourselves to a higher than normal standard, for surely the lost who look to us as example certainly do.
I ask whomever should win the presidency to moderate. As much as I would love to moderate and have myriad experience for it, It would only right and skill to have a independant moderator.
any takers?
|
|
|
|
Post by gynovia on Dec 19, 2005 15:08:52 GMT -5
sure. i'm game.
|
|
|
|
Post by heartofgold on Dec 19, 2005 15:13:39 GMT -5
Why not? This should be interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Armany on Dec 19, 2005 17:18:36 GMT -5
Interesting. I'd be interested to see what comes of this.
I'd gladly help TD moderate such a debate (assuming we win), deferring to TD as an assistant.
|
|
|
|
Post by falklands on Dec 19, 2005 22:27:39 GMT -5
Hey, can I get involved in this? I'm not running for any governmental offices but I can't resist philosophical debates. ;D
|
|
torc
Full Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by torc on Dec 20, 2005 15:33:13 GMT -5
I am glad that we have some participants.
|
|
|
|
Post by heartofgold on Dec 21, 2005 19:10:28 GMT -5
So, uh, when do they start?
|
|
|
|
Post by New Titania (TD) on Dec 21, 2005 22:02:53 GMT -5
Hey, can I get involved in this? I'm not running for any governmental offices but I can't resist philosophical debates. ;D Negatory, Falklands. heartofgold, we'll start as soon as MISTY makes the election results official. (everybody send her a TG and PM telling her to do so and swear the president in and get more active on the MB) |
|
torc
Full Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by torc on Dec 22, 2005 0:23:30 GMT -5
maybe if we all unanimously shout MISTY GET OVER HERE AND COUNT VOTES!!!! then she might appear. everyone, 1...2...3....  |
|
|
|
Post by Geberia on Dec 22, 2005 8:19:18 GMT -5
LOL!
Perhaps Falklands could be the moderator of the dabate???
|
|
|
|
Post by falklands on Dec 22, 2005 10:57:21 GMT -5
I believe Torc wanted someone who won the presidency to moderate. That would be either GDL or TD. And TD already said I wasn't qualified to participate (no government position). It's up to you, however.
|
|
torc
Full Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by torc on Dec 22, 2005 15:24:47 GMT -5
Well as the quasi founder, I would think that you, as any free citizen, are allowed to submit questions, but any moderation should be at the behest of the President. as a side note...yesterday I had 2 for karma...now I'm at 1...I wonder what happened there |
|
|
|
Post by New Titania (TD) on Dec 22, 2005 17:44:57 GMT -5
Whoa, torc, I'm sorry! I read your plea for karma and planned on "exalting" you, but I accidentally "smited" you!!! SORRY! *ducks from tomatoes* Now you're at 0.  As for the moderating, I believe I could go ahead...I am the Vice President, after all, and our current President is inactive. And FOR REAL, guys, please pm and TG Misty and beg her to become active again!! Tell her to count the ballots and swear the winner in and just become active in general! |
|
|
|
Post by heartofgold on Dec 22, 2005 20:42:14 GMT -5
Welcome to the club my friend. I've lost so many Karma points I could (insert dumb "paint a house with them" kinda comparison). I'm so persacuted... Of course, people give me Karma points too... |
|
|
|
Post by New Titania (TD) on Dec 23, 2005 2:08:59 GMT -5
All right, I can now moderate the debate in my official capacity as President of the region.
My first question is to everyone, please answer it, but do not respond to anyone else's answer.
What do you view the role of a Council of Law member to be?
|
|
|
|
Post by heartofgold on Dec 23, 2005 11:37:35 GMT -5
First off, nice avatar.
Second, congrats on winning, I'm glad. I can finally take down this flag (no offense, but it was kinda bulky).
Now, to answer your question.
The Council of Law is there to vote on possible ejections, the possibility of war, to settle disputes between nations, and to rule on issues of constitutionality. It is also the highest judiciary body of the region. Therefore they also shall decide upon penalties to inflict upon lawbreakers (heh heh).
Oh, and I'm leaving for Christmas, won't be back for a while. Continue the debate and I'll try and answer the questions when I get back.
|
|
|
|
Post by gynovia on Dec 23, 2005 13:42:09 GMT -5
i think as a COL members, its your responsibility to not only vote on ejections, but if you see something that you think is unnecesary and needs to possibly be ejected, to bring it up to the COL. of course other ppl can bring those kinds of things too of course a big part of the COL is dealing with other nations, particularly nations threatening to invade. oh, i too, will be gone for quite some time during christmas break, but i'll try to stop by when i can. oh yes, TORC, i karmad you so you should have 1.all alrightly? |
|
|
|
Post by Armany on Dec 23, 2005 15:38:39 GMT -5
I apologize if I'm breaking any rules by posting here, but I couldn't help but ask a question about a Constitutional issue that applies to the CoL. Heartofgold recently said (I'm not trying to pick on you, heartofgold ) that one of the CoL's purposes was to "vote on...the possibility of war." It was my understanding, however, after checking the Constitution, that Declarations of War were to be made "by the advice and consent of the Nations of CT," or, in other words, by a regional vote. I derived this evidence from Section 2 of the Constitution. Also to be noted is that, in Section 4, there is no mention of the CoL having any say in declarations of war. Can anyone clarify this that has knowledge of the Constitution? |
|
torc
Full Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by torc on Dec 23, 2005 16:49:22 GMT -5
I will respond to the President's question and I will go to Armany's if the moderator agrees to ask it.
What is the role of a COL?
1-Be a good Christian in our jobs.
That is a little rule that we all forget in nearly everything we do. From driving, to eating, to appearence, we should do ALL things in a pleasing manner to Christ.
2-Follow the constitution and the Bible where the constitution is ambiguous.
Being Christians, we have the benefit of the holy spirit to guide us in all our actions and decisions, so using them in all interpretations should be consulted as well.
3-Be fair and forgiving.
Follow the law, but forgive as the lord forgave you. Don't sacrifice regional security, but don't drop the sword on a pleading neck at the first possible time. We are all extrememly imperfect and we all have been worthy of that same harsh judgement at one point in time.
4-Ensure regional security and integrity.
While being forgiving, the region must be placed in high importance. Invasions MUST be stopped, and useless swaring and sexual entendres must be expurgated from the region if we can hope to maintain a sucessful lamp. The COL should back the executive in the objective, all the while protecting the rights and trust of the defendant.
5-Stay out of the way.
The COL should only step in when necessary. Let the government run like a well-oiled machine. Only use your powers when absolutely necessary.
The reason why I stay broad in the duties is that life is more interesting than fiction. You cannot over restrict the regulators for the purpose of simply restricting them. At the same time, everyoen must know his place. Unlike regular politics, Christian politics and government should be like that Utopia Sir Thomas More wrote. We should all trust each other and share the needed resources. Unlike the common nations, we are all brothers and sisters in Christ, and should act that way.
Was my answer satisfactory?
|
|
|
|
Post by heartofgold on Dec 23, 2005 18:35:11 GMT -5
The FBI will be at your house shortly...
I suspect, I might be wrong though, that any nation can request regional declarations of war, but the Council of Law votes to uphold (is that the right word?) the request. It does say in section 4: So I think the COL has something to do with war.
|
|
|
|
Post by New Titania (TD) on Dec 23, 2005 23:45:30 GMT -5
Gynovia, Torc, you can go ahead and answer Armany's question.
|
|
|
|
Post by falklands on Dec 24, 2005 15:44:46 GMT -5
I think now that Armany will moderate the debate (as vice-president) until TD comes back from his Christmas holiday, am I right?
I would like to ask the CoL (after you all respond to the previous questions): What is your position on the separation of Church and State? How much power should the Church exercise in the State? Since we all know that a theocracy is perfect until you have people ;D, what should be done to keep Christ in the State (providing you are against a separation), and yet not make the State an oligarchy/autocracy? All this, and other comments helpful to the issue, I would appreciate from the CoL.
|
|
|
|
Post by Armany on Dec 24, 2005 18:34:00 GMT -5
I would assume that I would temporarily take over TD's moderation duties while he's gone, Falklands. If that is so, then I'll wait until everyone has answered the previous questions before presenting new ones.
|
|
torc
Full Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by torc on Dec 24, 2005 23:37:39 GMT -5
As for the issue of war. I agree with what Madison said, "The executive should never have a say in the going to war." The judiciary is exactly the same, in my hopefully humble opinion. It is the judiciary's job not to jump in unless it is illegal.
As far as I can read and as far as I believe in a seperated system, the Judiciary, or the COL, should only interevene if somehow a motion to go to war is illegal. I am not sure how it could be so, but the question would be resolved. As for practicality, that is left for the people to vote on, not the judges.
|
|
|
|
Post by New Titania (TD) on Dec 25, 2005 16:52:12 GMT -5
Yeah, Armany, you can take this over until my return. Falklands, first, you were out of line for asking those...I never recognized you. Second, they don't really have all that much to do with CT because the so-called "separation of church and state" is never mentioned or referenced in the CT constitution. Plus, the region's NAME is Christian, so I believe there really is no seperation in CT and really is not a valid question. Please disregard Falkland's questions. NOTE: If anyone else wants to ask a question, first ask for my permission (or, in the next week, Armany's). |
|
