|
The announcement of the arrival of the Mormons has created quite a bit of discord within the convention. Many doubt that allowing them to settle along the passages to the gold fields is good, and much anti-Mormon feeling is rampant within the Anglo population, less so among the Californio population as they have little knowledge or experience with the Saints. "They're trying to hog all the gold fer themselves!" "They aint even Christians!" "It ain't God that's speaking to their prophets but Satan himself!" are common refrains at the Niantic. Attendees clamor for some kind of voice to decide how to deal with the issue of large-scale Mormon immigration... OOC: I am using numbers rather than letters to prevent this from getting confused with the still-open issue of the franchise 1. The Mormons are looking to set up a nation where they're in complete control and they set themselves above all other men! They are free to live here, but their attempt to wrest control of the best farmland of the Valley or the passages to the gold fields is unacceptable. They had better evacuate from any nearby land completely (Mormons can exist in California but on the outskirts, far from the gold fields or San Francisco but not so far as Utah) 2. The Lord our God does not suffer a man to preach against his word. These Mormons should be put to the sword, each and every one of them, run out of California altogether! (Mormons will be killed or persecuted until they run away) 3. The Mormons are strange people, but their beliefs are not so different as those of the heathen Chinee or Indian, let them stay and make what they can of this land, and govern themselves according to their own rules, in their own communities. (Allow the Mormons to settle where they wish and live as they wish) 4. If the Mormons wish to live among us, they must do so under our rules, and our laws. They may not preach their doctrine to other men, nor can their petty theocracies ever trump the laws of our newborn Republic. There should be no consideration of Mormon towns, Mormon cities, Mormon states. (The Mormons can stay but they commit themselves to whatever civil law is to be established, and are not allowed to preach openly)
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
William Brannan Mormons have been here from the beginning, we have shed our blood alongside you, lived alongside you, and will build this nation alongside you. Most of the options presented are nothing but barbarism, cannot we live in peace? 3
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
4 without the restriction on their preaching
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
 Jack Hays Freedom of religion is vital to our liberty. However, these Mormons arrive in a large host, are well armed, and are known for causing conflict wherever they exist. I support keeping them at a distance, away from the economically vital mine fields, for the time being until our new Republic can achieve true stability and can guarantee the safety and security of all. 1 Sheng-Ji Yang fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:4 without the restriction on their preaching William Brannan I thought it would go without saying, but of course that we fully intend to be in compliance with the civil law of the land. We have no designs on theocracy, merely the shared prosperity we may all build. I am open to 4, especially if the ban on preaching is lifted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Fall Sick and Die posted:The announcement of the arrival of the Mormons has created quite a bit of discord within the convention. Many doubt that allowing them to settle along the passages to the gold fields is good, and much anti-Mormon feeling is rampant within the Anglo population, less so among the Californio population as they have little knowledge or experience with the Saints. "They're trying to hog all the gold fer themselves!" "They aint even Christians!" "It ain't God that's speaking to their prophets but Satan himself!" are common refrains at the Niantic. Attendees clamor for some kind of voice to decide how to deal with the issue of large-scale Mormon immigration... Bingham Young  The Church of LDS is taken aback by this sudden turn of events. We have spent the better part of a decade fleeing persecution, and our compatriots would now seek to put us to the sword yet again? Understand that, as of now, California has little order or rule of law. Those seeking to place us under civil law are not misguided - we have full intention to follow the laws of our new nation, and are actively working with our non-LDS brothers to forge a new Republic for all God-fearing Christians. Our settlements enjoy the full weight of the law, as much as John Sutter's mills or anyone else in California, for there is currently a lack of order in our new West. We do not seek to bring anything but God's order to these lands, ensuring that those who receive and will receive land grants see their legal rights respected, and those who seek their Earthly fortunes are able to do so without harassment or fear. Free passage to the mountains and lands rich with gold has been a founding principle of our community, and one that predates this new debate. We cast our vote for option 3, as it is the only one that recognizes our unique rights, and allows us the freedom to preach our faith. Let it be known that any restriction on our preaching will be considered unacceptable, and risk the ire of the LDS community.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
 4, if they wish to live in California they must do so as citizens of the California Republic!
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
 John Sutter The only correct answer is let them stay but let them know they cannot jump to the front of the line with respect to settling near the best land. The Mormon presence has proved to undermine internal stability with their queer religious beliefs and we should let them stay but they cannot maintain their disruptive acts. 1 Paper With Lines fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
 Pío Pico We have, at this time, a unique opportunity. We can build a just Republic in which all peoples are respected and enfranchised, Anglo or Californio, Catholic or Protestant. Even Mormons have a place in this Republic, however queer you might find them. Our fledgling nation possesses vast tracts of land, and I argue we should open our arms to all! E 4(without restrictions on preaching)
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
 John C. Frémont Gentlemen, gentlemen! Upon what values is the nation of California built upon? We will be this new Republic upon a foundation of Freedom, Liberty, and Equal Rights, or upon a flimsy base of Tyranny, Prejudice, and Inequality? I am not the world's most political man, but when I hear talk of sending us back to the tyranny of Rome, oh my heart does fill with patriotic rage! TELL ME! If you are not here in California to be free, then why are you here? TELL ME! If you believe in restricting the natural rights of man, then why aren't you hanging with the likes of Santa Anna? And TELL ME! If you don't believe that All Men Were Created Equal, then why are you writing a constitution! Is there something you see that I don't? Or, perhaps, with my being so UNJUSTLY stuck in a jail cell, do I have a greater appreciation of Freedom and Liberty than you all? If our country is to stand Strong, it must stand Free! We must give every man a vote! But! More than that! We have to take things a step further! When the Thirteen Colonies had their revolution, did they merely stop at the idea of independence? Did they say, "Well, we're free from Britain now! That's all we need!"? NO! They embraced the enlightened ideas of Freedom! They declared that men have natural rights! They did not just stop at writing a constitution! They gave us the bill of rights! And they did not just make a copy of Britain's parliament! They gave us states! Local government! And now, as we have our revolution, shall we stop at the status quo? Shall we merely emulate the styles of the United States? I say NO! If we want to be a truly enlightened democracy, we must keep going forward! We must do as the eastern Founding Fathers did! We must give rights to those who have none! And so I say... LET US GIVE THE VOTE TO EVERYONE! TO PEOPLE OF ALL CREEDS AND COLORS! IN CALIFORNIA, NO MAN SHALL BE A SLAVE! NO MAN SHALL GO WITHOUT A VOTE! And for that matter, neither shall any woman! Let us give the votes to our wives, and mothers! Do you not trust their judgement? Some may call this idea radical, but I say it is only natural! I must emphatically ask you all to vote for Voting Option E! And as for the Mormon matter, let me say this! I have not once encountered a cruel Mormon! In fact, in these times of troubles, no group has been kinder to me than those who follow that church! If people like General Kearny would put me in jail, and people like Mr. Young would set me free, there is no doubt who I'd rather have as a neighbor! I endorse option 3!
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
General Stephen W. Kearny What good are the Natural rights of men if they apply only to some? What faith is there to place in a state that claims to uphold the rights of liberty and property arbitrarily? have we become so sanctimonious and hypocritical that we wish to uphold little more than fedualism under the guise of republic? As to the mormon question, there can be only one proper conclusion. That they are men like any other. Men entitled to the rights of property and liberty we espouse our support for. We can ill afford to drive off settlers for superficial disagreements of church. Let them settle where they please, and preach what they will. I cast my lot for option 3
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Commodore Stockton i hope that this convention might indulge me my thoughts on some of the matters that we are discussing. That is to say, the question of first, the franchise, and second, the question of the Mormons. First, as to the question of who should have the franchise, we much first consider the alternatives. Some have spoken with admiration of the Roman state, which granted citizenship regardless of race to those who provided service to the state and the people of Rome. But, I think, if one considers the example of Rome, he can see the dangers of such an approach. Consider, that in the days of the Roman Republic, the people lived virtuously and simply, with great care to limit the franchise to those of the Roman race and adopting Roman ideas. Indeed, even the Italians in the Republic were first denied the franchise, and even those of the Latin League, while they could govern their own affairs and elect magistrates for their local concerns, were denied the franchise in Rome. It was not until the end of the Republic, when Caesar, attempting to increase support for his tyranny, made senators of the peoples he conquered. And, indeed, if we look at the fall of the Roman Empire, was it not due to the Roman embrace of barbarians as citizens, in exchange for service in their armies? This influx of barbarians, lacking Roman virtue and Roman values, led to the fall of the Empire. Do we doom ourselves to fall as Rome fell? It is the destiny of the Anglo-Saxon race to bring civilization to this continent. Why turn away from that divine trust? Let us govern ourselves. Extend the franchise to all adult white men who are not felons. We must ask ourselves, though, what of the Mexicans; those who were here before we arrived. Are they to have the vote? Let us be judicious. For, it seems to me, these inhabitants come in multiple classes and characters. There are those in whom the blood of old Spain flows almost as strongly as the blood of old England flows in me. These are the heirs of El Cid, men of authority, who hold land and positions of importance. To these men, I say to them, if you are willing to swear allegiance to the Republic of California; if you are willing to put aside the tendency towards despotism that is in the Spanish character, I welcome you as friend and fellow citizen. Vote, hold office, help us make California a place where we all can live. On the other hand, we have those of low character and degenerate bloodline. More Indian than Spanish, without land, without property, without bloodline, it is their lot to serve and obey. Let them live among us, if they will. Let them succeed to the extent they can. But let us not abandon the state to them. Let us not give them the franchise. So, for Mexicans, I say, let us examine their character and bloodline. Let us see if they are worthy of full citizenship. If they are, give it to them. If not, deny it. Now, let me turn for a moment to the Mormon question. These people have caused much tumult and much confusion. It is my understanding that this sect was settled in Illinois, until their actions caused offense to the people of the state. After their first leader was arrested and killed, they moved west, intending to find a place where they could practice their religion without causing offense. They settled near the Great Salt Lake for a time, but then, hearing of California, and the opportunity for settlement here, moved to this land, where they have settled in the San Joaquin Valley, to the east of here. So what are we to make of them? California is a land dedicated to freedom. I say we have no place for religious discrimination here. If they wish to live peacefully, let us let them. However, at the same time, we cannot have a state within a state, nor can we allow any peculiar customs that offend morality. We are not a theocracy and have no room for those who would make one. So let them live in peace, but by the law of California. Let them abide by our laws, and be governed by our laws. Let them refrain from preaching their doctrine to other Californians. Further, while we are told that they will not block access to the goldfields or fertile land, the fact that they settle as a group on fertile lands along the goldfields is a thing that should be of concern to us. We cannot allow any one group, no matter how well-intentioned they may or may not be, to be able to control the state's resources. Let them spread out. If they dwell together with each other and apart from us, then rumors will inevitably spread, and hatred shall overwhelm them. They are free here. They need not huddle together as a group. I say to the Mormon, dwell among your fellow Californians. Do not separate yourself from us. Instead, contribute to all of us. If, however, they insist on living as a community apart, let it not be where they can prevent the free movement of others. So, that's D, really, and then a combination of 1 and 4
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
 Wang Long Fascinating, those that wish to continue with the American tradition ought to support expanding the franchise to everyone as even in your founding document states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." This is a completely revolutionary statement. One that embodies the American spirit you so proudly proclaim, but has never truly been reached. The Negro in servitude in the east is unable to fully participate in the American narrative as he is considered only 3/5th of a person, but we can rectify that mistake. We also have various people here in this land that aren't Anglo and won't be able to participate in this nation at all due to the color of their skin, but if we were to apply that ideal the Anglos hold highly. They ought to have a voice in this nation. Thus, expanding the franchise is being consistent with what your Founding Fathers sought to do. It is imperative unless this generation fails in the standard they brought up and thus I wholeheartedly endorse E. Religion is a personal matter and not one that a state ought to interfere in unless it is a threat to the public good. 3
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
Mr. Chu Chinese Immigrant
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
 José Castro We talk of freedom as something to be idealized, and yet your old countrymen in the east enslave their fellow man, both literally and figuratively. This atrocity cannot be repeated in our new grand nation. It is only permissible to extend the franchise to all people, regardless of their outward appearance or status. (E)Furthermore, the franchise is not useful if not exercised, and therefore I propose that we include in our founding documents the principle of Mandatory Voting! Only though full participation of all people can we truly be a nation for the people and by the people. On the question of the Mormons, are they not people too? Let them live and do as they please, but if they intend to live within our borders, they shall follow our laws. (4 but they can preach) They shall be allowed to preach their religion, but they shant forbid the settlement of regular citizens within their cities. Anyone must be able to live wherever they please, to include the mormons. However, no group, Mormon or non, shall set up an exclusionary zone of any sort. Only through integration will we become strong and powerful. Let it be heard that all people shall live and breed wherever they see fit.(And to include elements of 1 as described by Stockton(but not by law, just general encouragement to live among others)) HarmB fucked around with this message at 05:17 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 05:13
|
|
|
Giving any new players (we have 3) a chance to join in and post their opinions on franchise and Mormonism before tomorrow morning, then I will figure out who won the votes and introduce some new stuff. Once we have a few more of these votes, we'll move forward. Please take this as a chance to set up political groups, find people with similar or compatible goals who can work together with you, that kind of thing. Get to know people, talk, figure out what you want to do together! Once the game leaves the convention, it will get a lot more freeform in terms of what you want to do
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
Bringham Young The Great Baptism at the Sidon People of California, and honorable guests of this constitutional convention! As we vote on the future of our Republic, and as most of you have wisely recognized the rights of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, a momentous occasion is upon us. These days of raucous debate and solemn prayer in the city of Zion have produced not just extraordinary political thought, but a genuine miracle. In my time conversing with my fellow Californians, I have made many new friends, and some have begun to express interest in the ways of Jesus Christ. Begrudging no other God-fearing faith, they have seen the justice of the LDS' teachings, and recognized the miracles of the Great Prophet Joseph Smith. The teachings have moved them to their heart and soul, and they stand at the precipice, ready to take the first steps down the path to heaven. As such, I will be hosting a great baptism in the waters of the River Sidon (OTL Sacramento River), where all are invited to attend the rebirth of our hitherto misdirected brethren. All new converts, be they rich or poor, are invited to be personally baptised by the very hands of he who channels the avatar of God, the Great Prophet Joseph Smith himself. Invited to attend, having expressed their sincere interest in conversion to the LDS faith, are the following: General Stephen W. Kearny, President Pro Tempore of our young nation, wise beyond his years, battle hardened but not without mercy in his soul. John C. Frémont, explorer and close friend of the Church, whose spiritual redemption may accompany his political and legal redemption, pending the actions of our just President. Pio Pico, rancher and former governor a man who I have come to call friend, whose lands in the South stand at threat from those who would unjustly seize them. Jose S. Castro, militia leader and former governor another Californio friend, who has also recognized the truth in the teachings of Joseph Smith. William Walker, ambitious young man, a man of vision rivalling that of the Great Prophet, whose desires for expansion of our civilization are echoed by our faith. Kit Carson, explorer and adventurer, whose travels with Fremont and the Mormon Batallion during the exploration of the West demonstrated his mutual bond with the faithful. Any and all others are still welcome to attend, as this is likely a historical moment both in the history of our country, and in the history of our civilization. JosefStalinator fucked around with this message at 02:21 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 09:22
|
|
|
 Charles Lucien Bonaparte Ornithologist, Prince of Canino and Musignano Bonjour! Hola! Howdy! I am Charles Lucien of the House of Bonaparte. You may know me as the discoverer of the venerable Moustached Warbler, but I come to the good people of California not in my capacity as an ornithologist (although that is my true passion in life), but to lend my services to the new republic that is being built here.  An adult specimen of the Moustached Warbler, Acrocephalus melanopogon A few months past, I participated in the Roman Republic, having the great privilege of being elected to its legislature, the Roman Assembly. That experiment in democracy proved short lived, as my dastardly cousin, President Louis Napoleon, dispatched an army to crush the hopes of the Italian people and secure continued French domination. I present myself to you, the people of California, as a fighter for liberty and enlightenment. Viva la République! P.S. universal suffrage (E) and freedom of religion (3) should be inalienable rights in any new republic Enjoy fucked around with this message at 11:43 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
 Dong Reagan (東雷根) Oh, hullo. It is I, Dong Reagan, humble emissary from the most blessed and venerable Heavenly King of Great Peace, Hong Xiuquan, may he reign for ten thousand millennia. I have travelled many months to bring to you the good news of Brother Hong, and the Gospel of his Elder Brother. Perhaps you may have heard of Him? He walked on these barbarian lands some centuries ago? Ah, but I am remiss in my zeal to evangelize. I mean not to offend my most estimable of hosts, but it has been an arduous journey. We are but few in number, a small party of the God-worshippers from distant Cathay (as your foreign tongues refer to the Heavenly Kingdom), a foretaste of the feast to come. We yearn not to trouble you, but simply to be allowed to preach the good word of our elder brothers here in this land among our fellow Celestials, and to any laowai willing to hear of these glad tidings. Naught but only a dozen scholars and merchants, plucked from the highest and the lowest of the heathen Confucian hierarchy, bound together now as apostles alike, sent here to these far shores to minister in this new, golden land. If you do not wish to receive the word, it would be a veritable shame, but you may feel free to examine our fine array of silks and saffrons harvested from the Orient, or perhaps peruse my elegant collection of rare documents of learning. What's this? You have convened a council of decision-making? What quaint notions of governance abound in this place! Well, far be it for a guest such as myself to levy a foreign judgment upon this land, but my thoughts are as follows: The statecraft of Ahm-er-rick-ka are most bewildering, and it is lamentable that we did not arrive sooner to petition the institution of a proper king, preferably one anointed by God. But if you must be ruled by the common folk, then let it be all. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Even back home, Brother Hong has proclaimed the equality of the sexes, unlike the demonry of the hated Manchu. So we must support F. - equal franchise for all who worship Jehovah! As far as the second question goes, we have only begun to learn of the schismatic sects that dwell here. These Mohr-mun believe in a different brother to Jesus. Curious! And they claim this brother foretold visions, and married wives, and travelled across the land dispatching the evils sent by the established state. Hm. That does not sound altogether dissimilar from the works of Brother Hong. Yet Brother Hong yet lives, while this Joseph Smith is dead. A curio indeed. Very well, not yet knowing of the rituals and custom of this savage country, we Taipings can only be wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. So for now, let them live on their own, 3. But a close eye must be maintained, should their heresy devolve into blasphemy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 11:33
|
|
|
 Josiah Warren My brothers! We have before us a golden opportunity! A chance to regain for ourselves the fundamental freedoms denied to us by first the crown, then the "republic"! Man is not meant to be ruled, not by kings or politicians! We are meant to live our lives as free men! I implore you, my brothers, do not allow yourself to be seduced by the teachings of the Church of Latter Day Saints. Theirs is a method of control, as surely as any monarchy! By all means, all men and women must live as equals in our new world, and the imposition of hierarchies, of status and of power based upon any means must be fought by any means necessary! The second business is that of the vote. Though the tyranny of the ballot box is seen as a lesser evil by many, I believe we must do all we can to ensure that free and fair voting is accessible to all! Our nation fought a great war, against terrible odds, in order to proclaim that all men are equal and deserving of the same rights and opportunities. Well, that principle is one I hold dear, that I cherish, and I will make it's advancement the prime cause of my life until my final breath! Yay, and I will expand on it also! Our new nation must consider the votes of women equal to that of men, and the votes of the negro and the Chinese equal to that of the white. If we are, as so many here claim to strive for, to create a truly free state out here in the west, where all who live under its protection have a say in its laws, and all those who toil within it have equal voices before God. E4
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
Mr. Chu E3
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
 Samuel Brannan A glorious day indeed, that so many of the leading notables of the land should see fit to adopt the ways of our faith. I shall certainly attend the Great Baptism, not only as an Elder of the Church, but as proprietor of the Alta Daily, for this is surely an event of great historical significance. Mr. Dong, if I do have your name correct, I welcome all men of commerce to these shores. While your religious practices may not find much purchase among the denizens of this land, let us leave talk of such affairs to the side for the moment, for I have several thoughts on how we might bring mutual prosperity to your land and mine. Please do contact me at your earliest convenience if such things would interest you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Excited conversation takes place throughout the convention hall, arguments ringing from the rafters of the Niantic. The idea of a simple carbon copy of citizenship and the franchise as it exists in America is ruled out, a clear voice acclamation makes it known that the people overwhelmingly support an extended franchise! All people, all races, all sexes, the total extension of the franchise to every reasonable group seems to be moving forward! As the discussion turns towards Mormonism, the voices of the representatives grow far more strident. Two clear camps emerge, one which would force the Mormons to abide by all laws of the state and prevent them from preaching, and another group which would give them the same freedoms to settle and preach as they wish. Calls for voice acclamation are unclear, neither side is particularly louder than the other. In the end, ballots must be cast... the camp casting for complete freedom for the Mormons winning by about 10% of the vote. Thus the beginnings of the new Republic are forming! It shall be indeed, a Republic, based on laws and on the American model, but far more based upon individual freedoms and with a far wider franchise. The extension of freedom to the Mormons is seen as a keystone in the Republic's formation. That a group which is as widely feared and even reviled could be extended complete freedom of worship and settlement is seen as indicative of the character of the nascent nation. The details begin to be sorted out, and now it comes to the nuts and bolts of how to make decisions in this country. What sort of character it should have. How government should function. A Republic along American lines yes, but how is that to work? America with its tens of millions, spread across multiple states, while California with a bare few tens of thousands, spread across one giant state. The impossibility of creating a copy of the American senate instantly becomes clear, unless great changes are made. Just the coastal region of California occupies an area as large as that stretching from Boston to Georgia. Thus the discussion progresses... How should we divide up the land of this nation, California? A. The coast and near-interior should be split into a large number of states. Each state sovereign unto itself, each state with its own government, in control of its own destiny, with the federal government existing along the American model. Our Republic will consist of a Senate and Congress, representing variously these states and the people, again, as per the United States. (Divide California into a bunch of powerful states, starting with those closest to the coast where there is physical control, a senate represents those states individually, and a house of representatives represents the people, as in America) B. California has never been divided before, and the idea of introducing artificial distinctions between the people of Los Angeles, San Diego, Monterey, San Francisco, and elsewhere is reprehensible. We do not need to parrot everything about the American government, let us have no senate, nothing but a single unicameral legislature, a Congress, elected directly by the people. We shall have administrative divisions of course, not states but provinces, and they will be directly responsible to the Federal legislature, along the lines of a nation like Republican France. (No powerful states, all provincial administration is directly controlled by the Federal government in a unicameral legislature, much more of a French system) C. The divisions of the state should be consequential, with some powers delegated, but rather than allowing the states to have a say, we should represent the various classes within society. We should follow the British model, with a House of Lords, and a House of Commons. Let the House of Lords represent the wealthy and powerful in society, and have membership for life. Let the Commons represent the base citizenry. (A more British system of a Parliamentary republic, adjusted to live without a monarchy) In addition, with the promotion of the discussion towards the widely expanded franchise, some questions have come up, and some concerns have been voiced. 1. The franchise should be open for all persons, regardless of age, race, religion or any other inconsequential division! 2. All men should have the vote, but women are far too emotional to be entrusted with such power. 3. All Christian men, of whatever form or character, should have the vote, but Mormons are not true Christians. 4. All Christian men should have the vote, including Mormons, who also worship the Christ! 5. The vote should go to all men, apart from those of Asian, Negro, or Indian extraction. At least the Latins have the blood of the Spanish, what would a Chinee or a Cherokee do with the vote?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Samuel Brannan We are one state, united, and to divide ourselves arbitrarily is to limit ourselves unnecessarily. At the same time, a unicameral legislature is prone to fits of passion, hasty decision making, and utter shortsightedness. As such, a balanced option - the voice of the people tempered by the wisdom of those with the most invested in the success of our fledgling nation. Universal suffrage without preconditions is lunacy - let all Christian men vote, regardless of race! Women may yet be extended the franchise, as the time becomes right. sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
Sutter On the question of government design, I am leaning towards an American style federal separated powers system to ensure that no man or faction takes control of government for their own private interests. On the question of how states are drawn, obviously that will be the question. A
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
OOC: A lot of people have been discussing conversion to Mormonism. While I will not stop anyone, I just want to make it clear that doing so will presumably result in large losses of influence if your influence comes not from wealth. Influence represents your ability to get things done, much of which comes from your ability to convince others to follow you. Right now, several Mormons have high influence, but they can be considered the biggest fish in a little pond. Non-Mormons generally have a very poor view of Mormons, so a conversion would probably darken their view of you and apply some kind of Infamy modifier, negative influence, which would not last forever but would work. Also consider for Mormon leaders, bringing other well-known and powerful people into the circle where you have near-absolute control might also lessen your own influence, as you'd have to contend with other people leading the group, more slices of the pie as it were, just something to consider, changing religion at this time for public figures would not be without consequence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
William Walker B4 Now that we have embraced this madness, then franchise for all men is the only choice consistent with the principles we have set forth thus far. Also, I truly believe the divisions of the East Americans are one of the factors that led to that nation's defeat in the war, a singular congress shall suffice for the realities of California. [edit]Changed vote from 2 to 4. ZearothK fucked around with this message at 11:12 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
 B1 When you're out trappin', you don't say no to a pair of hands. Our country is in the woods, and we must all come together if we want to survive the coming winter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:
Samuel Brannan Sir, on your trapping expeditions, do you employ children? The mentally and physically crippled? Extending the vote to all, as the proposal states, is naught but lunacy. Even the extension of the franchise to all men would be a radical expansion beyond what most people realize. Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Josiah Warren Freedom for one is freedom for all! Lest we impose upon our brothers and sisters laws which we could not ourselves bare. We gathered here have the chance to usher in an age of freedom and prosperity for all, and it would be churlish, nay it would be madness, to look upon the face of such an age and turn ourselves away! B1
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Charles Lucien Bonaparte Ornithologist, Prince of Canino and Musignano B: The ongoing revolutions in Europe show that any capitulation to the powerful will be seized upon and exploited to its maximum benefit. No concessions to the landed and wealthy! 2: we should look to the natural world to see the path forwards. Sexual dimorphism is thought to be the result of selective criteria during breeding. The plumage and colouration of the species results in different functions during nest building, egg incubation and chick raising. We see the same divisions in the human world, therefore we should acknowledge that the realm of politics should be reserved for men while women are the home makers and raisers of children. Ideally, we should also create legislation to restrict men from wearing brightly coloured clothes and large hats. Enjoy fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
General Stephen W. Kearny Gentleman, as we convene here today to discuss the framing of our soon to be nation, I feel for the first time I must exercise the power vested in me as President pro Tempore. I see among the men of property, influence, and hope, those who are little more than wolves in sheep’s clothing. I wish to inform those that serve a foreign union, or espouse the radical and liberal ideals of anarchy and tribalism, that though I wish no ill intent on their person, that they can for reasons I hope are evident, have no say in the construction of our nation. They are welcome to co-exist among us, and speak their mind as is the right of all men, but we cannot let anarchist lunacy, and foreign agents have any say in the construction of our republic. Therefore, I hereby decree that no man of anarchist philosophy, or foreign service may remain present in this debate hall except as an observer, never a participant, and I hope that those gathered here today with a stake in our future nation, will support me in this measure. Now, if I may digress to the discussion on hand, I maintain that the future of the nation must be entrusted to those god fearing and gentile men of property and rationale, be they protestant, Mormon, or convert. We can’t let our future be driven by the emotionality of women, nor the godless morality of those who do not worship the lord Christ. On this matter I must express my support for: 4 Let all Males who worship the lord Christ express their right to vote. Furthermore, concerning the divisions within our society, I must agree that no concessions will be made between the classes. A single federal government representative of all shall remain supreme. As a side note concerning my stance on Mormonism, I hold nothing but deep respect for their god fearing ways, and believe them to be no more a threat than any other man of God, despite the occasional oddity of their life. However, I can’t express my approval of any conversion that occurs before the conclusion of this convention, as it would be little more than political posturing in my mind, rather than the spiritual redemption it represents. The question of my conversion will remain just that, a question, until the end of this convention, and the implementation of our nation’s executive office. cxcxxxxx fucked around with this message at 06:40 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
cxcxxxxx posted:General Stephen W. Kearny Samuel Brannan Sir, I must applaud this necessary and proper step, that the future of our nation be decided only by those with a serious interest in its continued prosperity and survival.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Bringham Young We are pleased that the convention has recognized the rights of the Mormon faith, and our initial reservations about the people of this great state have been removed. Let it be known that all are welcome in Moroni, and will be treated with the reciprocal kindness shown to our people. As we have already expressed our preferences for federalism, we cast our vote for option A And, we have already expressed our preferences for the franchise. Christian men should be given the vote, but were we to extend it beyond Christians, giving women the vote is absolutely unacceptable. We vote for option 1 JosefStalinator fucked around with this message at 11:34 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
Charles Lucien Bonaparte Ornithologist As one of the members of the constituent assembly which created the defunct Roman Republic, and discoverer of the Moustached Warbler, I feel I am obviously qualified to build the nascent republic to which I now belong. Yes, I belong to the Republic of California! I am no spy, no cuckoo stealing my way into the nest of a rival to plant my eggs before departing! I hereby renounce and abjure my French citizenship and the Italian titles I once bore. Enjoy fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
Voices raise after Kearny's speech, there seems to be a great deal of confusion. Who is a "foreigner" or represents a foreign power, and who is a Californian? A few scuffles break out when Californios jeer at Anglo military officers who still wear their American uniforms, "Who ees representing a foreign natione?!" With the lack of any clear consensus as to who is or is not a Californian, the pronouncement seems to have been ignored by the vast majority of attendees, almost none of whom have any kind of documents proclaiming them to be from anywhere, let alone California.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Bringham Young It is obvious that the question of citizenship is going to be of immediate importance. It would be wise for us to extend citizenship to all immigrants who arrive and residents already living within our Republic, assuming they pledge an oath to forgo any foreign allegiances and citizenship. The great majority of us were born outside of California, and many of us lack documentation of any kind, so a move toward resolution would be most wise to avoid future disagreements.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
OOC: Citizenship is the next decision for us to take so don't need to start debating it as of yet
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
General Stephen W. Kearny, Rresident pro tempore I wish to adress something now that serves as a stain on my honor, and a hypocrisy to my views of liberty. That being, the unjust imprisonment of of John C. Frémont. I take no pride in what I did, and I now see my actions were rash, taken in the spur of the moment in the situation I found myself in. I wished to prevent the slip of the territory into military rule or despotism, and knew not whos views I could trust. I see now that in my attempts to restrain possible tyranny or injustice, I acted as a tyrant. Thus, I wish to extend an invitation to Frémont to attend our gathering in person, and as a free man. Private correspondence between us two gentlenman has shown us as equals, and with my deepest sincerity I recognize the sin I have comitted. I hope that we can preclude any future tensions between us two, but I recognize his right to think ill of me nontheless. I hereby free Frémont so that he may attend the convention in person
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
Samuel Brannan It is clear that the choice has now become whether we have an arbitrarily geographically-divided nation, or one in which the voice of the people is allowed to ruled unchecked. If this is to be the choice, the answer is disappointingly obvious: the former. While I still believe in the value of a House of Stakeholders, I cannot let the enemy be the perfect of the good. Shifting support to A
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 00:43
|
|