If you ruled your country or city

[Goodbook]

Er.

My country is an island. So we dont have that problem.

But I will make it so that cruise ships sailing around nz ought to serve nz produce on their menus so there will be no hassle with MAF border regulations about bringing food into the country from off the ship. Because australian milk and fruit quite frankly tastes terrible.

 

[Goodbook]

Also, if anyone wants to go to israel on holy land tour, then passage is paid for, because everyone ought to celeberate their sabbaths and feasts. The bible does say gentile nations would go up to jerusalem to celebrate feast of tabernacles.

 

[Goodbook]

Also, i would bring back flying boats. And real Georgie Pie restaurants.

 

[Rhamiel]

if I ruled my own country it would be a traditionalist Monarchy
not an Absolute Monarchy, but rather one where the powers of the King were balanced by the rights and privileges of different segments of society
this can be compared to how England used to be with the Magna Carta (before the Glorious Revolution)
Absolute Monarchies rose up much latter

there would be toleration of most religions, but the idea that all religions are equal would be done away with

of course abortion would be outlawed, because it is killing a tiny person

there would be a lot of other laws needing changing too
those are just the first two I can think of

 

[William67]

if I ruled my own country it would be a traditionalist Monarchy
not an Absolute Monarchy, but rather one where the powers of the King were balanced by the rights and privileges of different segments of society
this can be compared to how England used to be with the Magna Carta (before the Glorious Revolution)
Absolute Monarchies rose up much latter

there would be toleration of most religions, but the idea that all religions are equal would be done away with

of course abortion would be outlawed, because it is killing a tiny person

there would be a lot of other laws needing changing too
those are just the first two I can think of

Maybe you should check out micronations.

 

[Goodbook]

Instead of abortion just being outlawed, I would make it that couples who married and had children would have a benefit for each child.

this is to prevent fathers abandoning their children if they don't think they can provide. each child is precious.

any woman who did fall pregnant outside of a marriage I would make it so the impreganator i.e. the father of the child was given parenting lessons along with the mother. Like cumpulsory parenting school.

To prevent this, early child development classes and home economics would be a subject everyone would study in high school.

 

[Rhamiel]

Maybe you should check out micronations.

I have read about those
I was thinking about a conversation I had with one of my friends years ago
they assumed that every medieval monarchy was an absolute monarchy, when really that was more of an invention of the early modern world

 

[William67]

Instead of abortion just being outlawed, I would make it that couples who married and had children would have a benefit for each child.

this is to prevent fathers abandoning their children if they don't think they can provide. each child is precious.

any woman who did fall pregnant outside of a marriage I would make it so the impreganator i.e. the father of the child was given parenting lessons along with the mother. Like cumpulsory parenting school.

To prevent this, early child development classes and home economics would be a subject everyone would study in high school.

Most fathers who abandon their children don't do so because they don't think they can provide. They are either cowards who hate the thought of being "tied down" or long for "playing the field". Although, I do know one woman who kicked her husband out because he wasn't making enough money and welfare "paid better".

 

[Rhamiel]

Romans 13:1-7
1Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God: and those that are, are ordained of God.
2 Therefore he that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. And they that resist, purchase to themselves damnation.
3 For princes are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good: and thou shalt have praise from the same.
4 For he is God's minister to thee, for good. But if thou do that which is evil, fear: for he beareth not the sword in vain. For he is God's minister: an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil.
5 Wherefore be subject of necessity, not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake.
6 For therefore also you pay tribute. For they are the ministers of God, serving unto this purpose.
7 Render therefore to all men their dues. Tribute, to whom tribute is due: custom, to whom custom: fear, to whom fear: honour, to whom honour.

 

[William67]

I have read about those
I was thinking about a conversation I had with one of my friends years ago
they assumed that every medieval monarchy was an absolute monarchy, when really that was more of an invention of the early modern world

True. Most started out as a tribal chieftain who conquered neighboring tribes and consolidated power. But, even then, they basically operated like they had before, just being forced to pay "tribute" and homage to their new chieftain/king.

 

[Goodbook]

not sure what the difference is Rhamiel I didn't study history medieval history much although I did watch the King James Bible movie last night.

mostly what I know of Kings is in the middle ages some of them thought they had a divine right to rule. But I think it was the french one, Louis XIV or the Sun King that was an absolute monarchy? He didn't submit to God, he thought he WAS a god.

 

[Goodbook]

And of course, in the bible, the israelites wanted a King to rule over them just like all the other nations. But the only King that has the authority to rule is Jesus. However many did not recognise him as the Messiah.

the other kings had delegated authority, but many abused this and did evil in God's sight.

 

[Goodbook]

The Popes were basically roman emperors (kings) who became religious, although not all of them were truly born again. Thats why so many abused their power.

 

[William67]

not sure what the difference is Rhamiel I didn't study history medieval history much although I did watch the King James Bible movie last night.

mostly what I know of Kings is in the middle ages some of them thought they had a divine right to rule. But I think it was the french one, Louis XIV or the Sun King that was an absolute monarchy? He didn't submit to God, he thought he WAS a god.

The Pharaohs of ancient Egypt also thought they were "divine".

 

[SnowyMacie]

It really depended on the country. England never really had an absolute monarchy, and was one of the first countries to have any kind of Parliament, whereas France was more of an absolute monarchy from it's earliest days as a true national kingdom.

 

[Rhamiel]

It really depended on the country. England never really had an absolute monarchy, and was one of the first countries to have any kind of Parliament, whereas France was more of an absolute monarchy from it's earliest days as a true national kingdom.

I would say the Tudors and Stuarts of England pushed it towards Absolutism, but there was the Parliament that acted as a counter balance until the Parliamentarian forces gained almost total power with the Glorious Revolution of 1688

you are right, France did have more of a history of Absolute Monarchy, but that was still relatively late in history, with Absolutism really only coming about in the 1600's

The Popes were basically roman emperors (kings) who became religious, although not all of them were truly born again. Thats why so many abused their power.

the Pope is the Bishop of Rome
there was a Roman Emperor, and there was a Pope, two separate roles held by two separate people
we can see the role of Emperor evolve over time, with Frankish king Charlemagne gaining the title of Holy Roman Emperor in the year 800 in the West with the Byzantine Emperors in the East
even if we look at just the Roman Emperor in the West the last one died in the year 500
there had already been 50 Popes by that time
so to say that the Roman Emperors morphed into the Papacy is not an accurate view of history

 

[Goodbook]

Well you entitled to your view. I know that they coalesced into one at the time of constantine..in terms of state power and then religious power.

In england they were very anti catholic and the king or queen is meant to defend the faith. Thats they england has their own state church, the church of england. But they are of course meant to submit to God as well, whcih is why many people dont think prince charles ought to be King because he committed adultery. And hes not a born again christian, he doesnt show any interest in the faith. He has other ideas, although he does do his duties like charity work, but its not faith based. I think people are forgiving of him though because he confessed and his first wife died, so he was free to marry again.

 

[Goodbook]

They dont have popes and unmarried priests in the anglican church although it has become quite liberal.
The abbeys and monasteries were destroyed in the middle ages. I dont know the whole history of it but when i was england saw a lot of ruined abbeys, converted monasteries, etc. i mean convents. And such. Obviously theres westminster abbey. But catholicsim would not be the state religion, because they didnt agree with the pope. Which is weird because Henry the fitfth had eight wives i think and it was his idea to break from the catholic church for dubious reasons.

 

[Goodbook]

British Royalty is not allowed to marry anyone who is catholic.

But the thing is, Princess diana wasnt a christian...she was into new age religion. But because she wasnt catholic its ok. Ironically her mother became a catholic later in life.

 

[radhead]

The Pharaohs of ancient Egypt also thought they were "divine".

Everyone thinks they are divine because everyone thinks he is following God. Look at Abraham. Did God actually change his mind? Or did Abraham change his own mind, therefore changing his image of God?

Every person would like to create all of men in his own image because he thinks he knows what is best. And because it would make things easier for himself if everyone would just be like himself. Parents do this all of the time with their children. It's a part of human nature.