It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ten laws of lemuria - not bad??

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 06:37 AM
link   
here are the ten laws of lemuria from david childress's book lost cities of lemuria and the pacific: some of them are not bad i thought, could be useful. i particularly like point one. -

1. no person shall profit at the expense of another
2. no person singly nor the commonwealth collectively may take anything away from another by force
3. all natural resources shall remain the property of the state or commonwealth and may not be claimed as a personal possession by any individual or any group of individuals not constituting the entire citizenry (currently a lot of them are owned by the CROWN ie. her majesty.... in cth countries)
4. every citizen and every child thereof shall be entited to and receive equal education, equal opportunity for the expression of their aility and equal standing before the laws of the land
5. all advancement in position shall be based upon merit and the perfocmance of service alone
6. no individual shall be entitled to retain as a personal possession anything for which they have ot personally compensated in equal value
7. no individual shall have the right to operate int eh environment or personal affairs of another unless asked to do so by the person. the cth or govt may do so only where criminal or treasonable intent can be proved, or the civil rights of another have been violated.
8. no one may intentionally kill or injure another person except in the defense of life or state.
9. teh sanctity of the home shall be kept inviolate and no woman may be taken in marriage without her consent.
10. in all matters affecting the common good, and when no violation of natural law is implied or involved, teh opinion of hte majority shall rule, subject only to the consent of the ELders whose decision shall be final.

[edit on 28-10-2009 by rapunzel222]
eh, sorry... i got sick of typing halfway thru. have finished it now.. i quite like some of these


[edit on 28-10-2009 by rapunzel222]




posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 06:51 AM
link   
I wish our societies could live by those rules.
Too bad we are ruled by greed and money.



[edit on 28-10-2009 by DrumsRfun]



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Some of those sounds like Cuba.



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by rapunzel222
 




1. no person shall profit at the expense of another


If this isn't assuming Marxist idea of exploitation or his intrinsic value of labor theory I am fine with it. Expense is too loose a word. If it were changed to 'no one shall profit from the harm of others' I would be all for it.



2. no person singly nor the commonwealth collectively may take anything away from another by force
3. all natural resources shall remain the property of the state or commonwealth and may not be claimed as a personal possession by any individual or any group of individuals not constituting the entire citizenry (currently a lot of them are owned by the CROWN ie. her majesty.... in cth countries)


The second law seems to make the third law meaningless. A natural resource could be food, iron found on ones property, etc. Lets say I find some gold in the creek behind my house and I don't give it to the commonwealth. Wouldn't the commonwealth then have to use force to enforce law #3.



Most of the rest are okay, but these are two of the laws that kind of irked me.



posted on Nov, 5 2009 @ 06:57 PM
link   
These aren't bad laws, but like DrumsRfun said greed and money rule us. Maybe we can have another Constitutional Convention????

Peace.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Actually i thought of some ideas:

how about:

no person shall charge interest on a loan to another?

no person shall promise to give to someone more than they currently have of anything ?

(this is how banking and corruption got started in the first place. I have two chickens but ill promise to give you four, even tho i dont have them yet, so i can buy your ipod)

no person shall enter into a transaction for the purpose of benefiting themselves or amassing a profit for themselves at the expense of others?



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 


I think that number three is saying that natural resources of a country belong to EVERY CITIZEN as a collective. they dont belong to just the government or just the crown (a ruler) etc. they belong to EVERYONE and everyone shud benefit from them and have an interest in them.

i think this is what its saying, and if it is, then im okay with this.

Becuz the resources/gold belong to EVERYONE, then it isnt yours to start with so u cant keep it unless you give something of equal usefulness or worth to society in exchange?

as it wasnt yours to start with, no one is 'taking it off you?" (no 2?)



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join