Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]



Welcome to the forums of the Undead Dominion of Lazarus. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features

Username:   Password:
Image hosting by Photobucket
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • …
  • 5
Should an alignment be specified in the Constitution?
Topic Started: Apr 23 2015, 03:23 AM (697 Views)
Kazmr Apr 23 2015, 03:23 AM Post #1
Member Avatar
Lazarene
 The PRL was explicitly and constitutionally a defender region. Non defenders could join, but typically could not serve in the LLA.

Do we want this to be the case in the new Lazarus?

I lean in favor of yes. I think we built a strong defender tradition under the PRL, and I think now is the time to build on it. The entire defender community came together to liberate Lazarus with unprecedented results, and it would be a shame to move away from those who perhaps could be said to have been our biggest supporters.
Mini Profile Top
 
Gulliver Apr 23 2015, 03:27 AM Post #2
Member Avatar
Lazarene
 I'd be fine with specifying an alignment in statutory law, and would like it to remain Defender, but I don't think it should be in the Constitution.
Mini Profile Top
 
Funkadelia Apr 23 2015, 04:01 AM Post #3
Member Avatar

 I agree with Gulliver. The army should be legislated as defender.
Mini Profile Top
 
Kazmr Apr 23 2015, 04:03 AM Post #4
Member Avatar
Lazarene
Funkadelia
Apr 23 2015, 04:01 AM
I agree with Gulliver. The army should be legislated as defender.
I think he is saying that, just that he would prefer it be passed by the legislature rather than in the constitution itself.
Mini Profile Top
 
Funkadelia Apr 23 2015, 04:15 AM Post #5
Member Avatar

 Sorry, maybe I didn't make it clear that I support that also.
Mini Profile Top
 
Kazmr Apr 23 2015, 04:26 AM Post #6
Member Avatar
Lazarene
 Totally misread... somehow thought it said disagreed :P
Mini Profile Top
 
Wintermoot Apr 23 2015, 04:29 AM Post #7
Member Avatar
Like Love At First Sight <3
 The only difference is that if for some reason the region wanted to change alignments in the future I imagine it'd be easier to change statutory law than to amend the Constitution. I personally don't have a preference, but I just wanted to point that out.
Mini Profile Top
 
Benevolent Thomas Apr 23 2015, 05:29 AM Post #8
Member Avatar
Blessed of the Vale
 If there's a way to make an alignment change only possible via a super-majority in the legislature, I'd be okay with it being defined in statutory law. I don't want our alignment to change nilly-willy with each passing craze/fad.
Mini Profile Top
 
Funkadelia Apr 23 2015, 05:33 AM Post #9
Member Avatar

 I can see that side of the argument...
Mini Profile Top
 
Benevolent Thomas Apr 23 2015, 05:38 AM Post #10
Member Avatar
Blessed of the Vale
 If we leave the door open to "independence" as an alignment... I just can't even.

Defender, Neutral (as in no GP), or invader please.
Mini Profile Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Constitutional Convention 2015 · Next Topic »
Image hosting by Photobucket
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • …
  • 5


Theme by Sith - Recolored by Seth of Outline