Dec 21, 16 / Cap 20, 00 18:40 UTC

Need to guarantee religious freedom in Constitution  

Dear Asgardians,

I've red some interventions on the FB page pretending to prohibit any religion on Asgardia. I mean, they pretend to allow you to be Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Atheist ... but want to impede faithful people to freely share their beliefs. I think THIS IS NOT THE WAY.

We should propose that the Constitution of Asgardia include a protection of any religious belief and freedom of speech. No one may have to right to impede another to talk and share his personal convictions, as well as no one have to right to impose his to others. Only ideologies may be forbidden, as an ideology is not made of people really searching for truth, but trying to impose to people a way of thinking not based on ontological or real scientific bases to defend some people's particular interests.

Thoughts?

  Updated  on Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 15:45 UTC, Total number of edits: 2 times

Dec 21, 16 / Cap 20, 00 19:10 UTC

No one may have to right to impede another to talk and share his personal convictions, as well as no one have to right to impose his to others.

So you want to be able to proselytize. I'm confused. Am I not allowed to tell a person to leave me alone because that impedes their religious freedom. If so, I have to disagree because that opens up to the harassment of people who don't share the beliefs of the proselytizer.

See, this where religion tends to cause problems. They always want exceptions to made.

Dec 21, 16 / Cap 20, 00 23:09 UTC

Religions are just meant to share the highest feelings in a communal way!!!

Those 3 masshypnothic pools like Christdom, islum and Judaic faithes dont represent any god, any creation and are by shure not able to stand into our future, their kill-count is just contrary any divine law and we shouldnt give such uneducated followers any special rights to continiue such polarized/dualized practice offworld - god beware....

Any person who want to rise above others, use power over others should get notice by Bordcomp and need rehab urgently...

Constitutional guarantees like truth, unity and openess can actually contribute to generate a wholesome understanding of divine activities on a personal and collective level to contribute to Earthlings generally, we could constitutional guarantee to uphold this neverending quest of communion and sharing instead...

Our way to Godhood/Goddesshood shall man enable to grow beyond planetary limitations into our Living Light!

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 05:30 UTC

"You are allowed to believe in whatever you want" "As long as that belief does not have ANY effect on second or third entity" That is my firm belief in the matter of religion. But, what IS religion? Define Religion....

If i believe in a rock, and throws that rock in your back... Am i using my religion to hurt you or make you believe in it?

I would say, any belief in some abstract, supernatural entity, force should be called RELIGION....

Something that you CAN prove with tests, observations and or any other derivative there of, is not...

English is not my native language so be nice.

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 14:41 UTC

¿Se comporta así la naturaleza? ¿Discrimina sus individuos como lo hace la humanidad? ¿Le otorga más valor a uno que a otro?

En la naturaleza las nubes son iguales en la diversidad y valoración, los arboles son todos iguales en su diversidad, los climas, los animales, las flores, las aves etc. La naturaleza es una, en igualdad en su diversidad es lo que conforma su belleza y esplendor

Antes que diferentes somos iguales. Primero somos iguales luego diferentes. Primero valemos todos lo mismo, luego cada uno es distinto. Porque así es la naturaleza.

Pensamos al revés decimos primero somos distintos y en algún punto seremos iguales, o no. Somos de diferentes fisionomía, sexo, raza, religión, país, región, costumbre, creencia, posición social, pensamiento, etc. Pero si basamos nuestra valoración en las infinitas diferencias es un hecho que habrá conflicto, odio, guerra.

No estás separado de nadie, así como no está separado el dedo meñique de la mano. No eres ni serás más importante o más valioso que nadie, así como nadie es ni será más valioso que ti. He aquí la igualdad.

Todos somos valiosos por igual. Así es la Naturaleza. Así es la Naturaleza Humana y así piensa la nueva Humanidad.

Asgardianos la aventura de la creación de una nueva nación es apasionante, es una oportunidad para dar el ejemplo.

No estaría bien que se generase un nacionalismo Asgardiano , implicaría división el mismo error que llevan las naciones en el mundo, así nos fuéramos a los confines del universo llevaríamos el conflicto y las guerras al espacio.

Mientras el Ser Humano se aferre a una creencia ,doctrina, religión, nacionalismo, etc. estará poniéndose de un bando, creyéndose separado, considerándose más o menos que otros, distinto, diferente, dividiéndose a sí mismo de los demás y de sí mismo. Enajenándose. Desconociéndose.

Lamentablemente pienso que quien crea que su religion,nacionalismo,etc es mas importante en su vida que la premisa de igualdad, NO debe ser un Ciudadano de Asgardia. Que se quede aferrado a su dogma o creencia.

Un ciudadano de Asgardia debiera representar la Humanidad como Una.

Si he de pertenecer a algo la verdad es que solo pertenezco a la Nación Humana la única que existe, bajo el nombre que quieran ponerle, se debiera encarnar la Igualdad de los Seres Humanos por sobre todas las diferencias. Solo así podrá el hombre alcanzar la integración y la paz en este u otros mundos.

Does nature behave like this? Does it discriminate against its individuals as does humanity? Do you give more value to one than to another?

In nature, clouds are equal in diversity and valuation, trees are all the same in their diversity, climates, animals, flowers, birds, etc. Nature is one, in equality in its diversity is what conforms its beauty and splendor

Before we are different we are the same. First we are equal then different. First we are all worth the same, then each one is different. Because that's nature.

We think backwards we say first we are different and at some point we will be equal, or not. We are of different physiognomy, sex, race, religion, country, region, custom, belief, social position, thought, etc. But if we base our assessment on the infinite differences, it is a fact that there will be conflict, hatred, war.

You are not separated from anyone, just as the little finger is not separated from the hand. You are not or will be more important or more valuable than anyone, just as no one is nor will be more valuable than you. Here is equality.

We are all valuable equally. This is Nature. This is Human Nature and so the new Humanity thinks.

Asgardians the adventure of creating a new nation is exciting, it is an opportunity to set the example.   It would not be well for Asgardian nationalism to be generated, it would imply dividing the same error as the nations in the world, so if we went to the ends of the universe, we would bring conflict and wars into space.

As long as the Human Being clings to a belief, doctrine, religion, nationalism, etc. He will be putting himself on one side, believing himself to be more or less different, different, different, dividing himself from others and from himself. Getting lost. Not knowing.

Unfortunately, I think that whoever believes that his religion, nationalism, etc. is more important in his life than the premise of equality, he should NOT be a Citizen of Asgardia. Let him cling to his dogma or belief.

A citizen of Asgardia should represent Humanity as One.

If I belong to something the truth is that only I belong to the Human Nation the only one that exists, under the name they want to put it, should be embodied Equality of Human Beings above all differences. Only in this way can man achieve integration and peace in this and other worlds.

Admin edit: This translation is provided by Google Translator (http://translate.google.com). Take on account the terms of this forum, which you have agreed on by participating on this forum. English should be the language used outside the chapter forums. Thank you for your understanding.

  Last edited by:  Francisco Gimenez (Asgardian)  on Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 16:39 UTC, Total number of edits: 2 times

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 14:54 UTC

Creo que estoy de acuerdo con este anterior comentário no hay en realidad separaciones mas fuertes que las que se han creado ya en el planeta tierra tanto divisiones políticas , fronteras, fronteras religiosas, economicas, militares, y la verdad esa idea separatista estaba principalmente en la idea de unos cuantos, mientras todos creamos tan separado unos de otros si puede haber algun tipo de conflicto incluso si eso se trata de evitar porque simplemente si se actua unos deacuerdo a un credo otros de alguna manera pueden chocar sus ideas y eso puede generar ciertos conflictos y es cierto casi todas defienden su credo y no abren paso a perspectivas que pueden mejor hacer unidad

I think I agree with this earlier comment that there are no stronger separations than those that have already been created on the planet earth, both political divisions, borders, religious, economic, military boundaries, and the truth of that separatist idea was mainly in the Idea of a few, while we all create so separate from each other if there can be some kind of conflict even if that is to avoid because simply if you act some agreement to a creed others can somehow collide your ideas and that can generate certain Conflicts and it is true almost all defend their creed and do not open the way to perspectives that can best make unity

Admin edit: This translation is provided by Google Translator (http://translate.google.com). Take on account the terms of this forum, which you have agreed on by participating on this forum. English should be the language used outside the chapter forums. Thank you for your understanding.

  Last edited by:  Francisco Gimenez (Asgardian)  on Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 16:40 UTC, Total number of edits: 4 times

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 14:56 UTC

Eng text* Think I agree in the last comment stronger as The ones already createad theres no in reality separations ideas stronger in earth planet in The way political frontiers, frontiers, religious, economicals, militars as we know now and the truth that mental schemes is indeed separatist and was principally in the idea of a few, while all we believe so different each others that can create conflict in any way about even if that is what is want not do because is simple if is act accord with a religious actual any as we know and if try of defend " The relugious idea of a way or other can shock and create conflicts for that way of think about this not agree and not Open mind to perspectives not religious that can better make unity


Spanish text- Creo que estoy de acuerdo con este anterior comentário no hay en realidad separaciones mas fuertes que las que se han creado ya en el planeta tierra tanto divisiones políticas , fronteras, fronteras religiosas, economicas, militares, y la verdad esa idea separatista estaba principalmente en la idea de unos cuantos, mientras todos creamos tan separado unos de otros si puede haber algun tipo de conflicto incluso si eso se trata de evitar porque simplemente si se actua unos deacuerdo a un credo otros de alguna manera pueden chocar sus ideas y eso puede generar ciertos conflictos y es cierto casi todas defienden su credo y no abren paso a perspectivas que pueden mejor hacer unidad

  Last edited by:  Gabriela Romero Ramirez (Asgardian)  on Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 15:19 UTC, Total number of edits: 5 times

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 21:01 UTC

The only guarantee that should be granted should, i my opinion, be "personal freedom". That would in itself grant religious persons to practice any religion they like BUT with one good twist; they would never, because of the same rule, be able to "point finger" or accuse others of "sins". Doing so would interfere with OTHER people's "personal freedom".

In short: Believe in what you want but don't tell others what they should or shouldn't do. It is as simple as that. Really.

Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 00:56 UTC

I am agree about freedom as not in a religious squeme as actuals religions do about what is "should do" but anyways is can have a mark about since when start freedom and respect and conscience to have that free will determination to understand us as comunity

Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 01:14 UTC

Let´s try to reply a bit to everyone. For spanish speakers I´ll be glad to speak with them in spanish if they want in another place (where? Just tell me)... Translation:

*Por los hablantes del idioma Castellano estaré feliz de hablar con ustedes en este idioma, pero en otro espacio donde podemos usarlo con mas facilidad*

Well. I´m a Scientist(Physicist), and I have studies in philosophy and religious sciences. When I read that all the religious people are like " stupid minds" blindly following leaders, I can quote you some of the most brilliants scientific of humanity minds who are or were themselves believers.

You can´t just judge people because the adhere or no to one belief of their own, whatever it is a very personal faith or a faith shared by billions of peoples.

To negate the right to a person to express and share his beliefs, even in religious matters, is contrary to personal freedom of expression. No one must be forced to believe or follow, but the FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS ESSENTIAL. For me, atheism is nothing more than a philosophical tendency, which I not share, but that must be also respected. BUT I´m TOTALLY OPPOSED TO THE VIEW OF SOME PEOPLE WHO PRETEND TO IMPOSE IT BY PROHIBITING OTHERS TO TALK AND SHARE ABOUT THEIR OWN BELIEFS.

We, as human beings, are individually different. Searching for unity is a great goal, but this unity has to include our difference and RESPECT IT, or it just simply won't work. No one has the right to force someone to shut up because he-she doesn´t share even the dominant belief. Pretending to force someone to " keep his religious or philosophical beliefs in private" is completely dictatorial.

Well, that´s my point of view. Thoughts?

  Last edited by:  Cedric Lenners (Asgardian)  on Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 01:15 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: complete the argument

Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 05:41 UTC

Basically, it goes like this.

Religion is a lot like a penis. Everyone's got one. It's possibly not a good idea to be getting it out in public, however, and a really bad idea to try shoving it down someone's throat.

tl:dr;

You having a religion is fine, me having to hear about it isn't.

Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 12:42 UTC

Religion is a form of ideology. It tells people what is right and what is wrong, what must they do and what mustn't. So any religion propaganda should be banned. Religion must be exclusively private, not shared for others. While as a personal worldview it must be absolutely free (if it doesn't says to harm others).

Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 15:51 UTC

I agree with SirCedric. Freedom of Speech, freedom of religion should be an unchangeable right in our constitution. Naturally, I would want blocks on religious influence on government activities and possibly lobbying type things, but if it's run like a private enterprise, there should be no reason to ban it. Also to address people fearing being pointed it at and shamed for their sins, this should be considered harassment and would be dealt with accordingly.

The constitution should include Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Thought, Freedom of Assembly, and many others. I would like to see the best parts of the UN Chart of Basic Human rights integrated into our constitution.

Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 17:18 UTC

To EyeR:

If you don't want to listen or read to someone, just don't do it, or are you afraid? Freedom of speech is essential, as you also have the right to listen or no.

To AVR

No, a religion is not an ideology. A religion is based on people really searching for thruth. An ideology is based on a decided principle around with is constructed a doctrinal corpus. The difference is in the premices. Ideologies don't search for thruth, they just want to make their principle accepted by people

Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 17:26 UTC

About sins and «finger pointed» :

Obviously they will be disagreement about what is right or wrong on moral and ethical maters. It'n normal. The key is RESPECT.

We must have the right to say: «I think this, what you say, what you do, what you believe,...is not right» But always respecting that another may think differently.