I think you're both out of line, but also not so bad. I just arrived and I am sure I will be dealing with non-seriousness myself, it is usually the case. So, for one I thank you Patrick for the warning, yet I will proceed.
To respond to a few things:
"It is my opinion that there is an extraordinary paradox in challenging UN Treaties while simultaneously pleading that you become a member. That line of thought is beyond reason, and I think you would be much better off staying with dialogue rather than forcing your "Space Nation" idea on the rest of the World at this time."
To the first part, I must disagree(though I do not know the exact UN Treaties issues). I admit, I'm not entirely interested in the idea of being a part of the U.N., however anything should be challenge-able, even if you are trying to become members of the organization you are challenging. I would hope such an organization would see this as... a good thing, to challenge yet want to work alongside. It is easy to challenge and become opposing and have nothing to do with the other.
In regards to so-called forcing this "Space Nation" idea on "the World"... I must admit, a majority of my ideas involve leaving the Earth and its systems alone as much as possible, near isolationist levels on our part. However, even the idea of me wanting to jettison off, far away to avoid interfering with Earth's systems, some may consider "that" to be interfering. Is joining the U.N. the act of interfering on "the World" you speak of? I don't fully know the benefits of being a part of the U.N. is, but I assume if they "give" anything at all, it can be seen as "taking" from the rest. I personally think as little governmental and corporate assistance is the way to go, simply because getting assistance in this world seems to have too many strings attached that can ruin any project. I simply am going to try to explain the alternatives, we'll see if it's agreeable(hint: lots of engineering, invention, simulation, self-sufficiency, etc). I hope you can contribute to such a discussion.
"If this is how you really feel, then why don't you give up your citizenship and leave?"
This doesn't seem like a good thing to "say". It is interesting, because my idea of an isolationist space station away-from-Earth is very "opt-in" and very easy to "opt-out"(free trip back home, very difficult to get back in perhaps), therefore the entire concept of "if you don't like it, you may leave whenever". However, never would I likely take the stance of "if you don't like it, you SHOULD leave". I understand there is more conversation that I haven't seen, and perhaps Patrick is being too much elsewhere, but his primary post here seems okay, not deserving of this statement.
The capitalization is slightly concerning, and it gives me a similar feeling to when I hear religious terms. I just wanted to state that I feel any over-abundance of nationalistic pride and such is just, I dunno, worrisome. I barely even agree with drawing lines in the ground and having a geographic zealotism towards it. This is probably just a pet-peeve, and maybe you do not represent how most Asgardians represent their nation, but alas.
Patrick's eye rolling and sarcasm and such..
This is just silly, I'm afraid that at first I felt you were fine in your statements, but this seems to "undo" some of that. Perhaps I should not judge since you seem to be on your way out, and I myself surely will waver in my character and show some part of me that feels to "undo" any meaningful statements before and after. I suppose, I don't want to judge you based on you breaking the semi-professionalism you had before, but I can't help but do so and I'm sure others may feel the same.