Originally posted by MayharmElections would held once a year, every year in Secularia. Voting Day would be a national holiday with everyone getting the day off from work. The purpose is to instill a greater sense of participation and involvement in the ongoing process of governing the country. Plus the makeup of the government would be changing gradually every year instead of making a complete change every four years. On Voting Day the people would elect one new member to the Executive Council to replace the outgoing member. One third of the legislative branch would be up for election. Every three years they would get to vote on a new member to the Supreme Court.
What's the reasoning behind the yearly voting? I can see benefits behind focusing attention more on individuals, but there would probably be some negative consequences (such as that mentioned by decanter).
I dont think your executive branch is a good idea, you only need 3 for it to be a commitee, and being led by a commitee... Any country which doesn't ...[text shortened]... are little bit too much, or rather too few. Are there to be no cities in secularia?
MÅ¥HÅRM
The senior member of the Executive Council would be the spokesman for the group for that year, but all decisions would require the vote of the full five man body. I don't see why this would be a major problem. We don't want power to be concentrated in the hands of one person.
Yes, there will be cities in Secularia. The communals would not all be rural. Not by any means. Many of them would be integrated into the larger cities. Plus all the people in the capitalist sector would live wherever people normally do.
That's all I've got time for for now. More later.
Originally posted by ivanhoeCastro hosted the Pope in Cuba. Secularia would never do that. I bet if you work at it you can find some more differences.
Secularia and Cuba are spitting images .... don't you agree ?
............................ oh well , almost
I bet Cubans are allowed to hire a cab during strikes ........ 😉
Originally posted by rwingettI like the sound of Secularia. I'd probably want to move there. But I do have one rather fundamental problem with your vision.
Elections would held once a year, every year in Secularia. Voting Day would be a national holiday with everyone getting the day off from work. The purpose is to instill a greater sense of participation and involvement in the ongoing process of governing the country. Plus the makeup of the government would be changing gradually every year instead of making a ...[text shortened]... would live wherever people normally do.
That's all I've got time for for now. More later.
Many of the choices you've made for the country, particularly its taxation system and the way it runs its public services and economy, would normally be for the democratically elected Government of the day to decide upon. In a truly democratic Secularia (and its democratic nature you stress very heavily) you would not have any say over any of these things. All you could do is sit back and watch, and hope the people you'd recruited to your island were wise in their choices.
I don't like the Cuba jibe but it has an element of truth, because your country probably is at its heart a dictatorship, albeit a benign one. With you of course as the dictator.
Rich.
Originally posted by Faith No MoreExcuse my ignorance, but is it derogatory to refer to someone from Israel, or who is Hebrew, or is of the religious faith of Judaism as a "Jew"? Christ was referred to as the "King of the Jews", I've heard people refer to Israelis as "Jews" without any hint of malice, therefore I am puzzled by your remark. Please educate me so I don't make the mistake in the future of using the phrase "Jew" if it is derogatory. Shalom!
One rec for you, just because you rememberd from previous discussions to say "jewish people" and not "jews".
Shaul
Originally posted by rwingettWould your rules concerning religion prevent a church or synagogue from publically endorsing a political candidate?
Religion:
•Secularia is officially an atheist country. The government actively promotes a secular agenda.
•Separation of church and state is absolute and uncompromising.
•All religions are taxed and are strictly prohibited from engaging in the political sphere in any way.
•All children are required to attend secular public schools. Any religious edu ...[text shortened]... will be required to participate in at least one antigovernment demonstration before graduating.
Rob, I would like to start a TV/Satellite ministry basically to make a whole lotta money. As you have a "progressive tax" I think it would be a mutually benefical thing for both of us. I wouldn't have to work hard and your country would get a lot of taxes from me. Can we work together assuming I follow all your rules? I fully accept that you will not like me.
Originally posted by bbarrI guess. A priest could endorse a candidate in his capacity as a private individual, but not in his official capacity as a priest. The church, as a collective unit, would be prohibited from endorsing anyone. Officially anyway.
Would your rules concerning religion prevent a church or synagogue from publically endorsing a political candidate?
Originally posted by rwingettSuch a prohibition seems equally a violation of the seperation of Church and State. I could understand prohibiting a church from supporting a candidate financially, but prohibiting them from endorsing a candidate seems a violation of their right to free speech.
I guess. A priest could endorse a candidate in his capacity as a private individual, but not in his official capacity as a priest. The church, as a collective unit, would be prohibited from endorsing anyone. Officially anyway.
Originally posted by bbarrNo, I stated explicitly that the clergy would have the right to voice their opinion as private individuals. But the church as a an impersonal whole would not be allowed to endorse candidates.
Such a prohibition seems equally a violation of the seperation of Church and State. I could understand prohibiting a church from supporting a candidate financially, but prohibiting them from endorsing a candidate seems a violation of their right to free speech.
Originally posted by kirksey957Only if it was not included in basic cable. It would have to have a separate subscription rate.
Rob, I would like to start a TV/Satellite ministry basically to make a whole lotta money. As you have a "progressive tax" I think it would be a mutually benefical thing for both of us. I wouldn't have to work hard and your country would get a lot of taxes from me. Can we work together assuming I follow all your rules? I fully accept that you will not like me.
Originally posted by rwingettHow would this differ in structure from a North Korean collective farm?
Name: Secularia
Communal sector:
•Egalitarian socialist communities of up to 500 people each will form much of society.
•All the communities will be organized into a Federation of Egalitarian Communities to facilitate cooperation and support between them.
•Communities hold their land, labor, income and other resources in common.
•Communities assu ...[text shortened]... ucts of their labor and distributing these and all other goods equally, or according to need.
.
Originally posted by steerpikeBecause they're managed collectively by all the members. The North Korean collective farms employ collective labor but are managed from the top down by an overarching communist party hierarchy. Secularian collectives will be egalitarian and non-hierarchical. They will be modeled after the Federation of Egalitarian Communities (FEC) that exists in the US, and not after the North Korean model.
How would this differ in structure from a North Korean collective farm?
.
Originally posted by SiskinPitcairn Island. That's a good one. I'm surprised you didn't suggest Alcatraz Island as our permanent home.
rwingett, I don't think you'll need to take over Madagascar or even Cuba...Pitcairn would be plenty big enough to accomodate everyone who'd want to live in Secularia. If you ever do set up the country can I take your place in the USA?