@Phicksur

I am so sorry to hear you and your family have to stomach such atrocities in the frontline.  I wish I had positive words of encouragement.  All I can say is that you guys are heroes for having to see his mug on a daily base.  At least your houses won't be floating on innertubes upstate, so there is that.

@ Rick D , You are right, we do have an incredibly rare opportunity here - the people can and should have strong input to the behavior of Government, and its limitations.  But at the same time, it is important that we establish a general (not necessarily enforced) moral code for people - if not just for something to advise that we teach our children.

This isn't like other countries.  We have a long term goal of peace and prosperity of all humanity and it will go a long way if we can establish the public opinion of morality now and watch it change over time as some challenges are resolved and new ones arise.

This could highlight points where government and civilian morals can intersect.  Remember - we expect that one day this nation will survive in the harshness of outer space.  If we say the preservation of human life is to be a priority, and you are to receive a signal from a manned satellite that has had some kind of failure resulting in the loss of crew.  You are the only satellite/ship in range that can divert course or shift out of your orbital path in time to save the crew, but the diversion and return to your current orbital range and positioning is a costly yet necessary operation for your livelihood.  Saving the crew would preserve human life, but could cost you a years profit, which then could result in depression and poverty for yourself and family.  What if we decided now that we took a note of the laws of robotics here: Asgardians should not harm other humans, or through inaction, allow other humans come to harm - so long as interceding does not have a notable negative impact on the Asgardian.  By this standard, our friends on the satellite are still dead.  But what if we agreed the government would reimburse those would intercede where the reach of government officials or rescue parties was not convenient or even viable?  I'm not saying the government should then foot the bill for every disparity used to preserve human life, but I definitely wouldn't oppose testing the idea pending economic status as it would help remove some of the blurred lines and tough decisions that can cause hesitation or refusal to act.

It's also worth noting that we should reach early agreements on certain issues that could lead to instability in the long term.  For example, the issue of homosexuality is still cause for major unrest on Earth.  If we are going to be a progressive nation, we should teach that homosexuality is OK, and frowning upon it is considered immoral.  Reasonably, you could state that to argue anything is immoral, you should state that it has a negative impact on your feelings and provide a valid and understandable reason as to why.  For the most part, people should not have the right to make decisions for other people unless they can substantially argue a negative impact.  Straight people shouldn't be able to stop consenting parties being married on the basis that "they don't like it".  If we raise future Asgardians to be tolerant of this, then it will become a non issue in a few generations.

Looking at issues such as extraterrestrial life, which at the moment is a non issue and given likely distances to any race that resembles civilization or intelligence it is likely to remain a non issue until the Sun goes Red Giant or Andromeda collides with the Milky way. But we don't know it won't be an issue .  Probability doesn't always favor the likely. Historically, humans don't like what is different to them.  It may be hundreds of thousands of years before we meet an alien civilization - if ever.  But the fact of the matter is it could happen one day.  And if Asgardians are raised to be accepting of all creatures great and small, and any and all intelligence that may or may not exist, we stand a greater chance of avoiding an interstellar war.

I think it's fair to say we should at least discuss a moral code, and while not necessarily putting in place we could collect data on it.  Going back to a previous example, we could say "tolerate homosexuality" (along with many other ethical statements) and simply have Asgardians decide in an app whether they agree or disagree.  We could publicly display the percentage of Asgardia that agrees alongside those who don't.  We could take a moral code survey once a year and watch the morals of the nation shift, ask ourselves why?  What are we doing right?  What are we doing wrong?  What are the people likely to want as a response?

We are a nation built on science.  We believe in cause and effect, and we believe in studying that relationship for the good of humanity.  At the very least, we need to do things differently to Earth.  Every citizen needs to contribute and work as a team to get this whole thing off the ground (heh heh... puns...), in every conveniently and non-invasive method possible.  And we should start trying to get it right from the start.

You're right, Lore. We should work on the limitations of our Government... I agree. However, while our Constitution isn't ready yet for voting, it's better we try to define ethics and its possible code. In my point of view, definitions are the basic steps for next levels.

Regards,

Leonardo.

I am glad it did.

This brings up the very point of why censorship is counter-productive. As a curious-minded individual, I want to know what that last bit was. I do not care if it was illegal, immoral, or heinous. I am just wanting to know the end of the thought.

It would be simpler if the post was edited to put the censored speech behind a spoiler or something, where one would be warned that it may be offensive or illegal, and then allow the individual to decide whether or not to look and see.

GNV

Hi everyone!

I am Jason. I have a PhD in cell biology, but my research is in neuroscience. I am particularly interested in the biology of stress, how monoamines (serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine) regulate the amygdala, hippocampus, hypothalamus, and cortisol/glucocorticoids.

I love the idea of Asgard, and hope we can get it off the ground ;-)

The defense systems in our new world are different with defense system in earth. If some systems in earth can use there but I don't think lot, we need develop and build new defense systems. Start today, we must think, planning and build our defense systems as soon as possible.

I too would be looking at the position of minister for defence for asgardia at the minute I'm currently still serving I have 18 years experience and counting ..my main role is reconnaissance and intelligence gatehering but inalso have many other positions throught my career including communications and CBRN and aircraft crash rescue service . I have yet to upload my blog but full details will be up asap

As Asgardia develops as a state, the role of an minister of defence will be among the most unique and challenging roles of any country. Mainly due to the fact of the majority of the territory of our nation will be in space. This unique situation from a strategic bering will make us both safe and vulnerable ato the same time. The vast majority of countries military capacity will not be able to reach Asgardias territory. Obviously as technology develops (especially when there is nation and established spaced nation) this in its own right will cause nations to develop space based weapons and tactics.

Every nation has the right of self defense. Defensive strategies and technology will be required and continually developed just to keep up with other nations technology capable of potentially attacking us.

But overall at least for the short term, the best way to maintain the safety of Asgardia is to develop strong diplomatic ties and perhaps look towards forming alliances to deter other not so friendly states from conducting such aggressive actions.