If the world became one unified nation, where should the capital be, and who should the president be?
I once wrote a story that included the World Unified as a single government. In my story the evolution of the timeline went that the world government came about as a union between the Greater United States of America (The US, Canada, Mexico and South America as well as all the Caribbean except for the Cuban Free State which stayed independent) and the United European Federation (The current EU enlarged to include Russia - but obviously not including Switzerland as they refused to join.)Anyway, due to the joining of these two mega-states they needed a new capital so they based it in London as the centre point of the two states and with a shared heritage with the US and Canada (Which dominated the GUS) and being a part of the EU which founded the federation (This was a few years ago) London made the perfect choice as well as already having enough infrastructure that it could grow and support itself with increased people.Unfortunately by the time my story was set, about 200 years after the rise of the United Nato Republic (as it chose to be called) rapid development and widespread immigration from all over the world of desperate people looking to make their fortune at the capital a great deal of deprivation had set in around the capital and although still called London the city now covered 2/3 of the territory of England.As for the ruler, the State was ruled by a council of 9 councillors. They were each elected by one of the 9 regions and ruled for 4 year terms - however it was very common for a councillor to get assassinated due to the fact that each councillor had 1.5Bn people to try and keep happy so in fact the elections were a lot more frequent than that and the real power was wielded by an army of civil servants who all reported in to the global secretary who was in effect a dictator even though no one outside of political circles even knew his name.As I say, probably not the best thought out or practical answer but it has made me very keen to find my old story so I can read it again.
How many people think that I speak logically and with reason and proof?
OmG don't you copy and paste this EVERY day? Are you ever going to stop with your propaganda? The first time I read it, I tried to keep an open mind. Then I saw that you posted it again and again and again. Obviously you are just trying to spread your propaganda.
My theory of relativity and life on planet earth?
@John W @Lodar of the Hill People @Thomas Allardyce - People like you are the soul reason why humanity has fallen into a slump. We were once a very kind and educated/intelligent species, and I very much believe that it will be that kind of world again someday. It's exactly as I've described, a feeding frenzy, people like you refuse to seek improvement so that we can live as how a human being should. As grim as things look now, reshaping the image of what it means to be a human being is exactly what needs to happen, otherwise human beings will perish. If you haven't noticed already, we aren't currently living in the most intelligent era as of now, that's because the dunces are vastly outnumbering the smart people, which is why we have so many problems. When I say living life to fulfill are destiny as human beings on the planet earth, I mean ridding ourselves of all the problems we still have. Personal freedom nowadays is misinterpreted and abused. This is why we nee
Why was Canberra made the capital of Australia, even though Sydney and Melbourne are more famous?
There are several good answers already, however, some aspects have so far been omitted: racism, antisemitism, and opposition to trade unions.Melbourne, in the early 20th century still one of the worlds richest cities, was dominated by a class of wealthy, educated, liberal-minded entrepreneurs. Sydney was heavily dominated by trade union movements, who had successfully lobbied for the 8-hour workday some 50 years earlier. Both cities grew very rapidly, and there were conflicts of interest, and diverging opinions over what is known as “White Australia Policy”.Reactionaries everywhere were fiercely opposed to the ruling classes of both cities, and they sought for alternatives as far away as was legally and practically possible.John Monash, for example, was a highly successful and revered engineer, and would become one of the most successful military commanders in WWI. A more or less secular Jew, he was born to German immigrants in Melbourne. While there were few Jews in Australia, Monash exemplified the Melbourne intelligentsia at the time.Charles Bean, Australia's official World War I historian, and the newspaperman Keith Murdoch both wrote vile opinion pieces against Monash, explicitly for his Jewish heritage.At first, their lobbying was not particularly successful, and antisemitism, while far from uncommon, never really caught on in Australia.However, ten years after Monash’ death, and central to Australia’s capital to be - Canberra - the Australian War Memorial was built to commemorate the lost battle at Gallipoli - rather than his and his troops successes. And, over time, the date of the landing at Gallipoli would become Australia’s second national holiday: ANZAC Day.While not the only catalyst, fierce opposition to non-Christian, non-white, non-British immigration, progressive thought, and liberal politics were significant drivers behind establishing, building and eventually maintaining an entirely new metropolis in a sparsely populated, wooded area as an alternative centre of power.Further reading:Sydney vs Melbourne: the real Canberra story | Australian War Memorial - Wikipedia | Australian Dictionary of Biography | The evolution of Anzac Day from 1915 until today | Fact or fiction: 5 common Anzac myths put to the test | Australian labour movement - Wikipedia | White Australia policy - Wikipedia | Safe Haven: Records of the Jewish Experience in Australia | History of the Jews in Australia - Wikipedia | Canberra - Wikipedia |
Is the capital of Israel still Tel Aviv regardless of Trump's latest effort?
I’m afraid you have your question backwards.Jerusalem has always been the capital for the Jewish people for 3000 years, and certainly the last 70 years since the land was won in 1948.In fact, in a way all Trump did was talk about a real estate project the United States will be involved with, the moving of the embassy.The congress of the USA already declared that the government recognized the already established fact that the capital of Israel is Jerusalem. For 20 years each president has waived the law that would make the government put the American embassy in Jerusalem. Like all other embassies in all other countries which reside in the country’s capital (Jerusalem in this case.)Until now to appease the Palestinians who have never actually try to make a peace agreement, many countries have put their embassies in Tel Aviv (a 45 minute ride without too much traffic and soon to be a mere 19 minutes with a new train between the two cities) to not upset them. But in all those years, there has been not any real move to peace. So, what is the point?But all of Israeli government agencies are in Jerusalem and accommodations always had to be made. So what President Trump did was not to continue with that waiver. Therefore, the law is the congress has to move the embassy to Israel’s eternal capital - Jerusalem.Jews have prayed 3 times a day facing Jerusalem, praying for the rebuilding of Jerusalem like in the days of King Solmon. President Trump’s move only acknowledges the historical obvious fact.This is what President said in his speech on Dec 6, if you had listened you may have heard the same.
Question about Jewish Passover traditions regarding letting convicted felons go free(story in gospel)?
Releasing someone during Passover is not a Jewish tradition but it is a tradition of the Romans. The Roman Empire knew when conquering nations the best way to assimilate the conquered nation into the nation of Rome was to allow them to practice certain laws that they had. So the Roman Empire allowed the Jews to continue in their monotheistic beliefs instead of converting them to a polytheistic cult that they embraced. In a show of good faith, the Romans would release a person from prison that the Jews felt were wrongly convicted. They did this every year at the time of Passover. Generally, the Jews picked someone that was primarily put in prison for general unrest. If you closely follow the scripture, you'll see that Pilate felt sorrow for Jesus and brought out a serial murderer. A murderer of many Jews, knowing that they wouldn't want that person in their midst. But, the Jews turned on Jesus and still wanted him crucified, as it had to happen anyway.
LDS: G-d has a wife? Who is it? Is it Shekinah (as Kabbala teaches)?
I found this on several non-LDS websites describing LDS theology proper: "A "Godhead" of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as three separate entities united in purpose. God the Father resides in heaven with His wife, the Heavenly Mother; Christ, their only begotten Son; and "exalted" Mormons, who become God-like in heaven. God has a perfect body, which looks like ours." President Spencer W. Kimball: “You are daughters of God. … You are made in the image of our HEAVENLY MOTHER.” "Building upon the foundation laid by Joseph Smith, subsequent prophets taught that God was not single, but married; that there is a Heavenly Father and a Heavenly Mother; and that we were made in their image: male and female children." (James R. Clark, comp., Messages of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6 vols., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1965-75, 4:203, 205.) Is there anything else written about this "Heavenly Mother"? Is she still with Him in your teaching? Or do you believe as Kabbala does that she left YHWH to hook up with Lucifer (the "real" reason for his expulsion from heaven according to Kabbala)?
Why does Christendom remove Gods name Jehovah from their bibles?
There is no "j" sound in Hebrew, but there is one in English. "Jehovah" is English and is found in older English Bibles. Forms similar to "Jehovah" are found in Bibles in other languages. Many modern translators do not follow the example of Jesus, who said that he made his Father's name known. In fact, Jesus taught Christians to pray that God's *name* would be "hallowed" or sanctified. It seems that Christendom does not want to follow the example of Christ. While some say that "Yahweh" is closer to the Hebrew -- but this is not certain -- they don't use that form either. But it is arrogance on the part of any man to remove God's own name from God's own Word, when it is plainly there in the original text. Does it confuse people? Yes, but probably intentionally so, for those who want to push a particular theological position.