Dear sweet baby Jesus, let's not make this another thread about Flemingovianism.
That is my birthday!!Grosseschnauzer:How about compromising the date to be April 6th to commemorate the very existence of the Bill of Rights?
I wouldn't know, and I don't care.Crushing Our Enemies:So far, the only flemingovian holiday had a celebration leading up to it that was almost a month long - did you miss the blessing of the sugar canes?
Formal debate, five days, yaddi yadda.JhonsJoe:Okay. Now that that is sorted out.
I move for a vote.
Are you sure we're reading the same law? Cause the version I'm reading says,Grosseschnauzer:the way that one clause is written, adherents could take every day of the year off for religious holiday reasons, and they'd have legal protection doing so
17. Holidays of the Flemingovian religion shall be observed regionally, and all nations shall have the right to take a day off work, unpaid, on those holidays. Government officials are excluded from the effects of this clause.
I would like to hear the author's response to this question.flemingovia:Sorry? Why do we need this holiday again?
PS JJ, the above is a question. It is usual to answer them. I know from your campaign thread you have difficulties with the concept, hence the explanation.
Whatever Flemingovianist stuff is happening, count us out- 99% of Syrixia is not Flemingovianist.Crushing Our Enemies:So far, the only flemingovian holiday had a celebration leading up to it that was almost a month long - did you miss the blessing of the sugar canes?
Did I reference government officials? Read the entire clause, and you will see what I was referring to. As well as the fact that the scope of the clause as a whole could reach the entire calendar year if Flemingovianism chose to do so.SillyString:Are you sure we're reading the same law? Cause the version I'm reading says,Grosseschnauzer:the way that one clause is written, adherents could take every day of the year off for religious holiday reasons, and they'd have legal protection doing so
17. Holidays of the Flemingovian religion shall be observed regionally, and all nations shall have the right to take a day off work, unpaid, on those holidays. Government officials are excluded from the effects of this clause.
(Bolding mine)
One could make the argument about any regional holidays, period, but the dates and commemorations mentioned in Section 7.2 relate to historical events and documents in The North Pacific. And I would be mystified why the Bill of Rights would be less important than the other events and documents already marked by a regional holiday.mcmasterdonia:I would like to hear the author's response to this question.flemingovia:Sorry? Why do we need this holiday again?
PS JJ, the above is a question. It is usual to answer them. I know from your campaign thread you have difficulties with the concept, hence the explanation.
I'm pretty "meh" about this idea. I don't see a significant need for it.
Yes, you were referring to the part where people could take off work - since TNP can't give people time off work IRL, the only plausible meaning is that they could take off of work in TNP.Grosseschnauzer:Did I reference government officials? Read the entire clause, and you will see what I was referring to. As well as the fact that the scope of the clause as a whole could reach the entire calendar year if Flemingovianism chose to do so.
Or possibly just one: The Festival of Romanatus - A year long feast where only cheese is eaten, and adherents dedicate themselves to answering the question: Who is John Galt? (btw, the clause about taking a day off work is superfluous imo)Grosseschnauzer:365 days a year of holidays (366 during leap years)
Thank you for helping to bring us back on topic.falapatorius:On topic: I'm pretty sure this bill was intended to commemorate the Bill of Rights (the OP could clarify if he wants to). This seems straightforward to me.
Grosseschnauzer:One could make the argument about any regional holidays, period, but the dates and commemorations mentioned in Section 7.2 relate to historical events and documents in The North Pacific. And I would be mystified why the Bill of Rights would be less important than the other events and documents already marked by a regional holiday.mcmasterdonia:I would like to hear the author's response to this question.flemingovia:Sorry? Why do we need this holiday again?
PS JJ, the above is a question. It is usual to answer them. I know from your campaign thread you have difficulties with the concept, hence the explanation.
I'm pretty "meh" about this idea. I don't see a significant need for it.
That's a work in progress isn't it?Silly String:Frankly, I think the Oligarchy should give up their whole "I love the Constibillocode" schtick and scrap the holiday like we all know they want to do to the text.
I actually agree with CoE.Crushing Our Enemies:We should rename it Constibillocode Day.
Mind the papercuts.PaulWallLibertarian42:I do <3 the constibillocode. I want to snuggle it at night.
SillyString:Mind the papercuts.PaulWallLibertarian42:I do <3 the constibillocode. I want to snuggle it at night.
The Legal Code Section 7.2.10 shall be amended to read: "The seventh of July shall be Supreme Law Day, and shall commemorate the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Legal Code of the North Pacific."
Dear JhonsJoe,
I realise you are a busy person, but there are a number of outstanding questions in the thread where you proposed the introduction of a bill of rights day, and it would be very useful if you could visit the thread and answer them.
In particular:
1. Why do you feel this holiday is necessary?
2. Would you consider combining this holiday with another, say with Constitution day, to create a "supreme law day" or something similar?
thanks for your time
F.
I think that I would support this version if JhonsJoe was to adopt it.flemingovia:I present an alternate proposal for JhonsJoe to consider:
The Legal Code Section 7.2.10 shall be amended to read: "The seventh of July shall be Supreme Law Day, and shall commemorate the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Legal Code of the North Pacific."
I took the title "supreme law" from the laws page on this forum.