@scarbs - I don't disagree with you that most states tend to stick to general principles and leave matters of law out of the constitutional documents, however it could be interesting reading to have a little perusal of our own country's documents, you may be surprised at what you find written there. There are many constitutions that have quite definitive citizens obligations in them and they work ok without too much problem to the citizenry at large.
Although, as most would know from my previous posts in other forums, I have a rather cynical opinion of human nature I find it difficult to tar someone who has grand ideas such as the doctor has with the black brush just yet. Not knowing or talking to him and seeing so many obvious translation problems in this document I would be willing to reserve judgement.
As I said previously, There are a things in that document which seem superfluous, contradictory and definitely not the way I would have done it. However there is a fair amount of stuff that is general and ok. Perhaps put forward more ideas defining how we think it should be worded to allow for more control by the people, proper separation of powers and checks on that power.
I find it helps with my understanding of why releases are being written in this manner if I remember:
a) any state with peoples living in an environment in space in the future will definitely not be "business as usual". It cannot possibly be because the environment is completely hostile. It must be a created environment which is built, owned, maintained and staffed by the state. So a certain amount of dictatorial control is inevitable in the thinking of anyone who happens to be the one who thought up, paid for and launched it.
b) these documents are being written in russian and translated by people with no english-as-first-language skills. The documents contain big ideas and concepts which don't translate very easily. This means there is a certain amount of emotive junk introduced by superfluous and nonsensical statements at the beginning. These usually seem to get us all in a state of panic so we miss the intent of the wording.
c) I personally cant see that I have the right to tell my dad how to run his family, regardless of how much better at it or how much more knowledge I think I have. He bought me into the world and I just have to live with his rules. If I don't like it I can make a respectful suggestion and if I don't like the answer then I am free to leave. At this stage it's really the doctors baby and we've been asked to put forward suggestions. I can't see any real point in getting upset because the guy who came up with the idea, put his reputation on the line and put his money where his mouth is didn't like my suggestions.
I mean honestly @scarbs, you and @thor haven't even allowed a chance for your suggestions to be taken up before you started screaming blue murder. Settle down a bit and put forward sensible well written arguments as to why something is not a good idea. Post well thought out, researched ideas that define how you see things can or should be improved. You've done this impeccably in the past forums.
I'm not having a go at you mate or trying to be rude or sarcastic. And I am not saying the draft is what I prefer. I'm prepared to be proven completely wrong in all this, however I do think putting forward positive offerings of how to change it to be a better document is preferable to writing everything off before the cutoff date comes around.
Also, my fifth reading of the document coupled with some research shows that the structure is not as close to the hereditary despotic monarchical platform that we thought it was at first. There are reasonable structures and checks on power in there they are just very poorly written and leave large areas open to subjectivity. @nihylum has hilighted a number and cleaned some of them up for better definition. Also on re-reading @trackman1997's original post it seems to contain the thought process that can be used to properly define those checks and balances without the originator/financier of the project losing control of his own idea. If anyone is not sure of the areas of concern @LoreZyra has pointed out very clearly the areas which are allowing subjectivity in, or lack of the necessary checks on range of power by the various governmental positions and bodies.
Again I'm sorry if that offends anyone. That is not my intention.