I also do NOT accept the Constitution.

Once the constitution decided, we can not change it or a part of it without the Congressional decision.

I feel the same about Kingdom. Why not Country or Republic?

I also feel strange that the limited ages for the Ministers and Representatives is too old. 

Me, as a homossexual, do not feel myself represented in that constitution. Not a single word about my condition as a homossexual in the whole text. Instead only those general mentions to indivual rights being preserved, but why not mention clearly about the protection of diverse sexual orientation? Will be Asgardia a country equal to most of others, where sexual condition is left to a unspoken issue, a hidden stuff?  It is extremely dangerous to keep morality under so much protection. Will be homosexuality, bissexuality, transgenderness and many other variants of the human sexuality one day seen in Asgardia as a threat to moral? If that won't change, count me out!

Everyone is setting up a medieval hollywood film, today's monarchies are not tyrannical like those of years ago, today European monarchies have been the first to modernize and provide unprecedented rights and better quality of life, in addition monarchies are regulated in All Europe, and in Asgardia is equal, is a regulated monarchy.

Who wants to leave can do it, it is in his right, but I believe that a constituent monarchy is ideal, in addition to that the king will be voted by the people themselves, I see no problem.

Long live the kingdom of Asgardia

@Sley(Asgardian) on 20 July 2017, 11:47 p.m.

Everyone is setting up a medieval hollywood film, today's monarchies are not tyrannical like those of years ago, today European monarchies have been the first to modernize and provide unprecedented rights and better quality of life, in addition monarchies are regulated in All Europe, and in Asgardia is equal, is a regulated monarchy.

Who wants to leave can do it, it is in his right, but I believe that a constituent monarchy is ideal, in addition to that the king will be voted by the people themselves, I see no problem.

Long live the kingdom of Asgardia

I recommend you read the histories of "today's monarchies..." You will find they did not evolve without much bloodshed and war. Is this what you wish to see of the future Asgardia?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/king-of-bhutan-gives-up-his-absolute-monarchy-799881.html

Yes all Monarchs through out  history should be painted by the perception of the 5th to 15th Century Kings and Queens who claimed "Devine Right" to do anything they chose.

@Buck Rogers(Asgardian) on 24 July 2017, 11:44 p.m.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/king-of-bhutan-gives-up-his-absolute-monarchy-799881.html

 Yes all Monarchs through out  history should be painted by the perception of the 5th to 15th Century Kings and Queens who claimed "Devine Right" to do anything they chose.

Absolutely! History is the guide that strongly suggest a pattern for which we can easy follow into the future. To use your example of Bhutan, you first acknowledge that they started as an absolute monarchy. And, very recently became a democracy. Why is that?

Furthermore, the case of Bhutan is a unique case where no evidence of that region ever being conquered nor occupied exist. Since the Tibetan Buddhist started writing the history of that country, it has always been a kingdom. Its people have largely avoided wars, but have experienced their own long, bloody civil war until the late 19^th century. Aside from that, if their Kingdom was such a poster-child for what Asgardia should become, why are there still factions within Bhutan that want to setup their own governments? As recently as 2003, there were Assamese that unsuccessfully tried to separate from Bhutan.
Bhutan benefits from the unique and somewhat difficult geography that cannot make it exemplarity of how Asgardia should grow. As a “space kingdom,” there will be no difficult terrain to prevent (or make difficult) wars from interested parties. 

In regard to those “5th to 15th Century Kings and Queens,” Europe evolved through many painful changes on the road to democracy. Not starting from the 16^th century, but much earlier. In fact, there were many more challenges from the 16^th century on.
But I digress… The core question in why many have rejected this constitution: why not start as a democracy or something “better?” Why start with such archaic ideas with a terrible history around it?

Why should Asgardia be forced to experience those same painful growing pains as other modern democratic societies? The evolution from a Monarchy to a democracy (in one form or another) has never been an easy road! Why must we not only forget the legacy (and benefit) of Earth’s history as dictated by Declaration of Unity document, but also trip over ourselves as we shed blood and tears on the same road of repeat history? 

Yes, we should also forget the blood that has been spilt by those involved in Civil Wars.  Many being democratic in their system of government.  

@Lore Zyra
Because of, as we all know, a kingdom is the nearest thing to a company, but with the right to make its own laws, where the company have to respect its country government's ones, pay taxes, etc.
Not to underestimate: differently from a company, a kingdom have not to pay taxes, it can collect them, instead.

I do NOT accept this "constitution".

This "constitution" is a joke. Do you have the intention of being "modern" and to not repeat Earth Humans' mistakes, but are you adopting a Monarchy?!

please read https://asgardia.space/en/forum/forum/constitution-132/topic/constitutional-clear-up-7394/ and help clear up confusion and argument

Apparently my post was removed.  

@ankle biter.

I am unaware of any posts of yours being removed, I would encourage you to re-post in this case. 

thank you. 

I can't agree to a Constitution for a kingdom. It means that it will have a king soon. In my opinion, that is completely medieval. The other reason is that if I agree to the constitution even if I don't have to pay this year, probably I will have to pay in 2020, and if I don't contribute properly, I will be issued a fine  for not participating properly in a nation that does not exist geographically. I liked it better when it was called the space NATION.

The issues have been brought up before when it was first shown to everyone but the constitution was forced on people. There was no vote on whether to adopt the constitution or not, there was either accept it or not be part.  I did not accept the constitution then and I still won't as long as Igor ignores what others want.

So this person obviously didn't read the Constitution fully, and doesn't understand how implementation of a new nation works historically.  Igor is already Head of Nation, and the Constitution was made by at least 5 other people, with obvious help from lawyers.  

As for the start of a nation historically, it's better that it is a nation and not an empire setting forth provisions to seize space assets through military conquest.

Igor obviously doesn't want a mass vote to be able to disband the provisions of the Asgardian Constitution, or amendments thereof, so retains executive authority.  Also, he isn't a true King, as he is limited to being 82 years of age in office, and must set forth a successor a year before 82, and while his successor can be genealogical or any other condition, once set, Parliament can name up to 2 other potential candidates, which is ultimately decided by public referendum.

Also, you have to accept the Constitution before you can suggest amendments, so the person is essentially being a whiny child saying, "but this is how I want MY space nation to be", who obviously won't cooperate with recognizable authorities.  

Starting nations historically have been kingdoms due to people following a charismatic leader, and person wanting to colonizing space and other celestial bodies needs to have penultimate control over operations initially for it to be a success.  Could you imagine a public referendum over whether we send 2 kilotons of water to the moon before attempting to colonize it vs 200 kilotons, and having to wait for another referendum to correct that before the rocket takes off?  

Anyways, at first I was a little worried about the whole genealogical successor bit, but then I remembered why King's would name their son's  or daughter's as successors in the first place- It was because they would be inheriting their personal wealth, which is connected to the nation's wealth reserves.  All these people jumping on the band wagon want to say, well since I signed this constitution, or since I'm here, then Asgardia's wealth is collective in nature, when it's actually been set up and going to be bankrolled by Igor and friend's.  

Anyways, he isn't King in a true sense as he is going to set up a Parliament, Judges- who by the way are protected by immunity and set for 5 year intervals from deposing, so it's actually a nation by design, with a Commander in Chief as Head of nation. So if you've gotten to the end of this, you realize that just like any nation, intelligent ideas are going to be recognized and implemented, and only bankrolled into formation if Igor and friends want it.  To me this is a really good thing.  The other day I was calculating the US expenditure on military for the past 4 years.  It's over 2.5 trillion dollars. Could you imagine how advanced the US would be as a space nation if it disbanded the military 4 years ago and spent that 2.5 trillion dollars on space exploits?  The only domestic threat we have experienced in the last 4 years are domestic terrorism, which is prevented by the NSA, CIA, FBI, Homeland Security, and TSA which is budgeted differently than general military.  

At least someone is serious about space, and I'd love to be a part of it.