Topic is open just for creation of definition that will be universal for all draft versions of constitution.

1. “citizen”

2. “non-citizen”

3. "sapient"

Explanation:

Constitutions protect right of every human no matter is citizen or visitor and by that exclude any other group of beings to have rights equal to human.

Draft versions of constitution (available in several FB groups) show intention that as space nation we should done this differently. This is still open topic should be that way, for moment let we assume we did agree with this.

Proposition that is available is word “sapient”. Many disagree with that for different reasons. Many agree that is right way to do. There is no better proposal for now, so in draft version is “sapient”.

Personal opinion: I disagree with “sapient” since show elements of discrimination. Because of this, in mine opinion, word "sapient" will not be accepted by international law community.

Arguments:

1. Sapient exclude “only-sentient being” also all other type of beings we could encounter and we cannot define at moment since we cannot imagine them.

2. Possible problem is within questions “Is present discrimination of human in coma?”

Propositions:

1. We define “citizen” and “non-citizen” without using words as follows: human, sapient, sentient, AI etc and by that we leave to other legislative acts to do that in moment when is needed.

2. Definition should exclude possibility that I ask in the name of dolphin, tuna and/or chicken to have equal rights as citizen or human visitor.

3. Definition of “citizen” should include beings that belong to group of beings capable to show intention that by it choice are willing to have approved citizenship of Asgardia. Term “ask” is connected to sapience and should be avoid, so how to define this part?

4. Definition of “citizen” should include young one of parents that have citizenship of Asgardia. AI cannot have parents, so how to define this?

5. Definition of “non-citizen” should include human visitor and every other being that belong to group of beings that are capable that by their personal choice be under jurisdiction of Asgardia and have some type of interaction with us according to our laws.

6. If quote “belong to group of beings capable of” is changed with quote “belong to species capable of” then we need provide definition for “species” too as term that include species defined within biology, with addition of AI and life forms not know today no matter will be sapient, sentient, neither or combination of both.

7. Also we need left space that individual will be unique and by that will not belong to any group but will be capable that by it choice, by it will (choice and will should be defined too then) show intention to be either citizen of Asgardia or visitor under jurisdiction of Asgardia with protected rights equal to humans according to same law valid for humans.

8. Definition should exclude use of “understanding law” since word “understanding” is linked directly to sapience. Example, sentient being could feel energy changed when it follow common behavior and energies when it broke the law and by that it could perceive how to beehive to be acceptable.

This text will be edit so all propositions (for any term you see relevant to topic) can be seen at one place. :)

1) Definition provided within draft version of the constitution: FB "Asgardian Constitution Official"

"For the purpose of this document, "Sapient Being" will refer to all beings with sapience.

"Asgardian Citizen" and "Asgardians" will refer to Sapient Beings who are Citizens of Asgardia.

thus having the rights and liberties declared in this Constitution." by Cha Fontana

https://www.facebook.com/groups/asgardianconstitutionofficial/permalink/332780247100908/

2) Definition provided within draft version of the constitution: FB "Asgardia Constitution - Alternative":

"SAPIENT BEING: A being showing obvious sings of sapience and/or officially recognized as such."

Hi,

I'm a Physicist with some studies in philosophy and religious sciences. I'm actually working on political matters. I;ll try to solve here some questions mentioned in this post. I'll be happy to share opinions. Here are my opinions on the points of these propositions:

1. For now I think that only human being may qualified as citizen or no. Human being are the only known "sapient" species. Even if a human being not in actual state of being sapient for disease question, the human nature is acquired once for all, mustn't be any doubt on that. But the Constitution may keep the door opening to admit other sapient species if one day we meet or discover some.

2. About animal rights, I'm myself strongly in favor to give them some(to avoid cruelty), but obviously not at the same scale that human beings. So I think there is no need to mention them in a Constitution. We'll be able to enact future laws on this theme.

3. Citizen must be only human being who have passed thru the selection process of citizenship. I think the Asgardia is a great project, which as to be focused on Science advancement for the good of all mankind and the respect of space as a peaceful territory for all nations. No one who want to use Asgardia to promote ideas oposed to this basic project mustn't be accepted.

4. BE CAREFUL. We cannot guarantee that children will care about the project are the citizen parents. I propose NOT to include citizenship by filiation or family relationship. CITIZENSHIP MUST BE PERSONAL. Only children from 12 with they parents authorization may apply as individuals, wherever or not they parents are citizens or no. Only the case of children without any right of acquiring other nationality by birth (stateless person) may receive a temporal citizenship, as well as political refugees.

5. Totally agree with that point. Any sapient being must be granted some civil rights whatever he's citizen or no.

6. No need of putting in a Constitution, which is, to remember, a basic charts of rights, more than a mention of possible modification when we'll find a non human being capable of sapience. If the question is "how to define a sapient being". It's a big philosophical question, but I'll summary it by saying: "Any being capable of auto-reflexive thinking"( I know that I know, I'm conscience of myself and capable to abstract my thinking). This must include members of species which naturally possess this sapience( including members who have lost this by disease or any health problem) , as well as potential individuals who reach this level (as a single AI in the future for example?).

7. Same that point 6. Group include is sentient species (which the only one for now is human). Individuals have to be evaluated case by case using the "auto-reflexive thinking" criteria.

8. How can we force a being not able of understanding the law to follows it? Laws are made to be followed by sapient beings only, animals and other sentient non sapient beings must be protected by laws against abusive sentient by some laws, but can't be forced to follow a rule they can't understand (Same way that a mentally unfit person in this point)

I hope for your comments.

I agree with what you did write. Only difference between us is opinion who to include.

I think we need include all beings at our level or higher no matter will be only-sapient, only-sentient, neither or combination of both.

My aim was never to include animals, plants, stone, toaster, sensors (artificial sentient stuff), AI (artificial sapient stuff) unless they are capable to interact with us so by their free will they accepting to follow laws active within our society.

I never did say that some other being except human should be citizen of Asgardia. I just did follow what is open by using word “sapient” instead “human” and by that propose that we left door open to choose to change this one day.

Humans are not only sapient beings we know. Just because we do not know how to exchange information with those beings we cannot say we are only sapient being. Also is not good to choose use word “sapient” rather than "human" with aim to include more than just humans (AI, possible aliens) and in same time not be open that there exist much more we are capable to understand right now.

The Earth is not center of the solar system and on the same way sapient beings are not the center of all beings (or over all of them). Human is both sentient and sapient and who knows one day we could know that we are much more sentient then sapient, but for moment we keep religion and all “para-science” out of science and by that way we slow down our understanding of who we really are (what awareness is, what are feelings, what are dreams etc). I just try to say that we need be open for all topics for scientific research rather than keep that topics closed.

I still propose, let we define two terms:

1. “citizen”
2. “non-citizen”

Or if we cannot then that we use "human" as it is in other constitutions (rather than use “sapient”).

Both can be defined very simple.

For example:

CITIZEN. Citizen is individual that have approved citizenship of Asgardia.

NON-CITIZEN. Non-citizen is every individual that is not citizen, but is capable in-person show intention for self to have approved citizenship, where list of beings or group of beings that may have approved citizenship will be defined within other legislative acts with detail information about their needs related to all abiotic factors and / or food requirements needed to support “right to live” as well all other needs to support rights and freedoms given by constitution and other legislative acts.

And here should add for young one (or not as you did propose) in both definition. I agree that everyone should willingly choose to be Asgardian, but that is personal opinion (as well all I did write here).

I look forward to see response of more Asgardians :)