I repeat for the third time now. U.S. Army,
Further as has been stated before it is not unobtainable, if yo want to be head
augur then by all means you can, it is your internal conflict or Sulla's
internal conflict that is stopping you and no law can change that.
I find it funny that in a country swarming christianity, in the pledge, churches
every five feet, and even the ten commandments on the steps of courthouses. The
one place where we can truly have pride in our Religio and people moan and
complain about it.
DTIC
Nero



________________________________
From: Cato <catoinnyc@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 12:55:47 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica


Cato Iunio Neroni sal.

Just one small correction in all this: we are not a private religious
institution; we are not a religious institution at all. We are a public,
non-profit organization incorporated under the laws of the United States and the
State of Maine.


As such, we are subject to all US laws regarding discrimination. If that were
somehow not enough, *our own by-laws* guarantees our citizens freedom from
discrimination based on "ethnic heritage, gender, religious affiliation, or
sexual orientation", so any attempt to make any public office - magistracies,
priesthoods, the Senate - somehow unobtainable by *any* citizen is illegal.

And just FYI, the Maine Non Profit Corporation Act (Title 13-B) *specifically
excludes* religious entities such as "parishes", "local churches", etc.

Vale,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@...> wrote:
>
> Salve,
> So you have gotten off the cross and are now working for the governor's office

> in Maine?
> Wow then the cops better get busy because, uhhhh churches do the same thing as

> well as "secret societies" like the Freemasons. Hmm Who else
>discriminates....if
>
> only I had a government body like...oh yea the U.S. Army which does not allow
> women to fight front lines or gay men to join at all.
> Maine law may trump NR law but you are not the lawmaker nor the law enforcer of
>
> Maine.
> Be careful Sulla, all this talk about how illegal Nova Roma is and one might
> think you want it disbanded.
> Di Te Incolumes Custodiant.
> Nero
> Nihil Sine Dies
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...>
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 12:00:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
>
> Nero,
>
> That is NOT the case. Maine Law trumps NR law PERIOD.
>
> Your rationale, taken to extreme, just to give you a typical strawman
> argument. Nova Roma decides it wants to re-initiate slavery. We pass a law
> in the Comita saying Slavery is now legal. Guess what - it is not. Because
> we are bound by US law and slavery is specifically outlawed. Now that, as I
> just pointed out is a strawman argument but the principle is just as valid.
>
> You create a law that creates two separate classes of citizenship
> (intentional or not) that discriminates against another body of members -
> then that is illegal.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Sulla
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Let's not be martyrs.
> > No one is limiting anyone, I never said that christians should be limited,
> > however when you agree tot he terms of citizenship you know what is
> > required of
> > you when you take public office. NO one is saying that you MUST believe in
> > the
> > rituals but you must partake, just like any job who's job description has
> > something you don't like.
> > DTIC
> > Nero.
> > P.S. Did you ever think that maybe it wan't a limitation of the job but
> > maybe
> > that the people they hired were just better suited and qualified?
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...<robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>
> > >
> >
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 11:03:10 AM
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> >
> > If you are limiting Corporate positions to those just of a particular
> > FAITH,
> > then yes, that would violate Maine and US law. This is especially true
> > since Nova Roma is not a religious corporation, but a Public Benefit
> > Corporation.
> >
> > Limiting those positions would be considered Discrimination.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Sulla
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Riku Demyx
> ><rikudemyx@...<rikudemyx%40yahoo.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sulla,
> > > Does Maine law forbid polytheism? Unless it does I don't see s problem
> > with
> > > my
> > > post.
> > > DTIC
> > > Nero
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Robert <robert.woolwine@...
> ><robert.woolwine%40gmail.com><robert.woolwine%
> > 40gmail.com>>
> > > To: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > 40yahoogroups.com>" <
> > > Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > 40yahoogroups.com>>
> > > Cc: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > 40yahoogroups.com>" <
> > > Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > 40yahoogroups.com>>
> >
> > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 10:48:53 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > >
> > >
> > > Nero,
> > >
> > > You are not including Maine law in your analysis.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > >
> > > Sulla
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > On Aug 30, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Riku Demyx
> > ><rikudemyx@... <rikudemyx%40yahoo.com><rikudemyx%40yahoo.com>>
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Salve,
> > > > I can see both sides of the religious argument, and yes, the
> > constitution
> > > says
> > >
> > > > that there is freedom of religion. BUT We also have an official
> > religion
> > > which
> > >
> > > > is the Religio AND one of the main purposes of the organization is the
> > > support
> > >
> > > > and sanctuary of the Religio.
> > > > I'm not saying kick the monotheists out, I'm not saying anything of the
> > > sort.
> > > > But please do remember that a lot of us came here not just for the
> > > culture of
> > > > Rome but her religion as well.
> > > > DVIC
> > > > Nero
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: GAIUS MARCIUS CRISPUS
> > ><jbshr1pwa@... <jbshr1pwa%40btinternet.com><jbshr1pwa%
> > 40btinternet.com>
> > > >
> > > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> > 40yahoogroups.com>
> >
> > > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 9:49:14 AM
> > > > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > > >
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
<Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> > 40yahoogroups.com>,
> >
> > > "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > .......fuel the misconception that our dispute in the Senate is between
> > > > Christians and Cultores Deorum when it is anything but.
> > > >
> > > > Salvete omnes
> > > >
> > > > Please, citizens, let us not entrench ourselves behind religious
> > banners
> > > again.
> > > >
> > > > Can we not just recognise that there are people of all beliefs and
> > > traditions,
> > >
> > > > and none, here, but that at the end of the day we all have one vital
> > > thing in
> > > > common, which is why we are all here.
> > > >
> > > > We are all roman citizens, and the most important thing for all of us
> > is
> > > to
> > > >work
> > > >
> > > > together to heal the problems that are stopping our republic from
> > > expanding,
> > > > from moving forwards, from continuing to exist.
> > > >
> > > > Lets recognise that, yes there are some differences between us, but
> > those
> > >
> > > >should
> > > >
> > > > not be obstacles to working together.
> > > >
> > > > All religious wars end badly, if not now then in the future.
> > > >
> > > > Lets put our differences aside, and work together, not use up all our
> > > energy in
> > > >
> > > > internecine disputes.
> > > >
> > > > Valete optime omnes
> > > > Crispus
> > > > "Then none was for a party; then all were for the state".
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Nero,

You can be an Augur if you want. No one is stopping you.

The problem is when the Auguries positions oversteps the various offices of
the corporation. THAT is where we have an issue. The Presidents of the
Corporation may work with, but they should not be impeded by the Augurs. If
you create such intricacies that result in a glass ceiling where only
cultors can be corporate officers, then we have a problem. Do you
understand?

This has nothing to do with individuals becoming Augurs.

But when Religo officials overstep their bounds and impact corporate
offices. Ok?

Vale,

Sulla

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@...> wrote:

>
>
> I repeat for the third time now. U.S. Army,
> Further as has been stated before it is not unobtainable, if yo want to be
> head
> augur then by all means you can, it is your internal conflict or Sulla's
> internal conflict that is stopping you and no law can change that.
> I find it funny that in a country swarming christianity, in the pledge,
> churches
> every five feet, and even the ten commandments on the steps of courthouses.
> The
> one place where we can truly have pride in our Religio and people moan and
> complain about it.
> DTIC
> Nero
>
> ________________________________
> From: Cato <catoinnyc@... <catoinnyc%40gmail.com>>
>
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 12:55:47 PM
>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
>
> Cato Iunio Neroni sal.
>
> Just one small correction in all this: we are not a private religious
> institution; we are not a religious institution at all. We are a public,
> non-profit organization incorporated under the laws of the United States
> and the
> State of Maine.
>
> As such, we are subject to all US laws regarding discrimination. If that
> were
> somehow not enough, *our own by-laws* guarantees our citizens freedom from
> discrimination based on "ethnic heritage, gender, religious affiliation, or
>
> sexual orientation", so any attempt to make any public office -
> magistracies,
> priesthoods, the Senate - somehow unobtainable by *any* citizen is illegal.
>
> And just FYI, the Maine Non Profit Corporation Act (Title 13-B)
> *specifically
> excludes* religious entities such as "parishes", "local churches", etc.
>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Riku Demyx
> <rikudemyx@...> wrote:
> >
> > Salve,
> > So you have gotten off the cross and are now working for the governor's
> office
>
> > in Maine?
> > Wow then the cops better get busy because, uhhhh churches do the same
> thing as
>
> > well as "secret societies" like the Freemasons. Hmm Who else
> >discriminates....if
> >
> > only I had a government body like...oh yea the U.S. Army which does not
> allow
> > women to fight front lines or gay men to join at all.
> > Maine law may trump NR law but you are not the lawmaker nor the law
> enforcer of
> >
> > Maine.
> > Be careful Sulla, all this talk about how illegal Nova Roma is and one
> might
> > think you want it disbanded.
> > Di Te Incolumes Custodiant.
> > Nero
> > Nihil Sine Dies
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...>
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 12:00:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> >
> > Nero,
> >
> > That is NOT the case. Maine Law trumps NR law PERIOD.
> >
> > Your rationale, taken to extreme, just to give you a typical strawman
> > argument. Nova Roma decides it wants to re-initiate slavery. We pass a
> law
> > in the Comita saying Slavery is now legal. Guess what - it is not.
> Because
> > we are bound by US law and slavery is specifically outlawed. Now that, as
> I
> > just pointed out is a strawman argument but the principle is just as
> valid.
> >
> > You create a law that creates two separate classes of citizenship
> > (intentional or not) that discriminates against another body of members -
> > then that is illegal.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Sulla
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Let's not be martyrs.
> > > No one is limiting anyone, I never said that christians should be
> limited,
> > > however when you agree tot he terms of citizenship you know what is
> > > required of
> > > you when you take public office. NO one is saying that you MUST believe
> in
> > > the
> > > rituals but you must partake, just like any job who's job description
> has
> > > something you don't like.
> > > DTIC
> > > Nero.
> > > P.S. Did you ever think that maybe it wan't a limitation of the job but
> > > maybe
> > > that the people they hired were just better suited and qualified?
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...<robert.woolwine%40gmail.com
> >
> > > >
> > >
> > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> 40yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 11:03:10 AM
> > >
> > > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > >
> > > If you are limiting Corporate positions to those just of a particular
> > > FAITH,
> > > then yes, that would violate Maine and US law. This is especially true
> > > since Nova Roma is not a religious corporation, but a Public Benefit
> > > Corporation.
> > >
> > > Limiting those positions would be considered Discrimination.
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Sulla
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Riku Demyx
> > ><rikudemyx@...<rikudemyx%40yahoo.com>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sulla,
> > > > Does Maine law forbid polytheism? Unless it does I don't see s
> problem
> > > with
> > > > my
> > > > post.
> > > > DTIC
> > > > Nero
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Robert <robert.woolwine@...
> > ><robert.woolwine%40gmail.com><robert.woolwine%
> > > 40gmail.com>>
> > > > To: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> 40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>" <
> > > > Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> 40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>>
> > > > Cc: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> 40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>" <
> > > > Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> 40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>>
> > >
> > > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 10:48:53 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Nero,
> > > >
> > > > You are not including Maine law in your analysis.
> > > >
> > > > Vale
> > > >
> > > > Sulla
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 30, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Riku Demyx
> > > ><rikudemyx@... <rikudemyx%40yahoo.com><rikudemyx%40yahoo.com>>
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Salve,
> > > > > I can see both sides of the religious argument, and yes, the
> > > constitution
> > > > says
> > > >
> > > > > that there is freedom of religion. BUT We also have an official
> > > religion
> > > > which
> > > >
> > > > > is the Religio AND one of the main purposes of the organization is
> the
> > > > support
> > > >
> > > > > and sanctuary of the Religio.
> > > > > I'm not saying kick the monotheists out, I'm not saying anything of
> the
> > > > sort.
> > > > > But please do remember that a lot of us came here not just for the
> > > > culture of
> > > > > Rome but her religion as well.
> > > > > DVIC
> > > > > Nero
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: GAIUS MARCIUS CRISPUS
> > > ><jbshr1pwa@... <jbshr1pwa%40btinternet.com><jbshr1pwa%
> > > 40btinternet.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> 40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>
> > >
> > > > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 9:49:14 AM
> > > > > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
> > >
> > > > "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > .......fuel the misconception that our dispute in the Senate is
> between
> > > > > Christians and Cultores Deorum when it is anything but.
> > > > >
> > > > > Salvete omnes
> > > > >
> > > > > Please, citizens, let us not entrench ourselves behind religious
> > > banners
> > > > again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we not just recognise that there are people of all beliefs and
> > > > traditions,
> > > >
> > > > > and none, here, but that at the end of the day we all have one
> vital
> > > > thing in
> > > > > common, which is why we are all here.
> > > > >
> > > > > We are all roman citizens, and the most important thing for all of
> us
> > > is
> > > > to
> > > > >work
> > > > >
> > > > > together to heal the problems that are stopping our republic from
> > > > expanding,
> > > > > from moving forwards, from continuing to exist.
> > > > >
> > > > > Lets recognise that, yes there are some differences between us, but
> > > those
> > > >
> > > > >should
> > > > >
> > > > > not be obstacles to working together.
> > > > >
> > > > > All religious wars end badly, if not now then in the future.
> > > > >
> > > > > Lets put our differences aside, and work together, not use up all
> our
> > > > energy in
> > > > >
> > > > > internecine disputes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Valete optime omnes
> > > > > Crispus
> > > > > "Then none was for a party; then all were for the state".
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

With all due respect, Nero, I don't think many Nova Roman citizens have any sway in what the U.S. Army does. If what they do is wrong, as you seem to believe (I agree, in some cases), then why are you using that as some sort of justification for what other people think is wrong? Judging from some of the other discussions in which you have participated, you are above such faulty logic.

Also - please always have pride in being a cultor!! You should take that pride with you everywhere, not just in dealings with NR.

Optime vale,
Ocella

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@...> wrote:
>
> I repeat for the third time now. U.S. Army,
> Further as has been stated before it is not unobtainable, if yo want to be head
> augur then by all means you can, it is your internal conflict or Sulla's
> internal conflict that is stopping you and no law can change that.
> I find it funny that in a country swarming christianity, in the pledge, churches
> every five feet, and even the ten commandments on the steps of courthouses. The
> one place where we can truly have pride in our Religio and people moan and
> complain about it.
> DTIC
> Nero
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Cato <catoinnyc@...>
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 12:55:47 PM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
>
>
> Cato Iunio Neroni sal.
>
> Just one small correction in all this: we are not a private religious
> institution; we are not a religious institution at all. We are a public,
> non-profit organization incorporated under the laws of the United States and the
> State of Maine.
>
>
> As such, we are subject to all US laws regarding discrimination. If that were
> somehow not enough, *our own by-laws* guarantees our citizens freedom from
> discrimination based on "ethnic heritage, gender, religious affiliation, or
> sexual orientation", so any attempt to make any public office - magistracies,
> priesthoods, the Senate - somehow unobtainable by *any* citizen is illegal.
>
> And just FYI, the Maine Non Profit Corporation Act (Title 13-B) *specifically
> excludes* religious entities such as "parishes", "local churches", etc.
>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve,
> > So you have gotten off the cross and are now working for the governor's office
>
> > in Maine?
> > Wow then the cops better get busy because, uhhhh churches do the same thing as
>
> > well as "secret societies" like the Freemasons. Hmm Who else
> >discriminates....if
> >
> > only I had a government body like...oh yea the U.S. Army which does not allow
> > women to fight front lines or gay men to join at all.
> > Maine law may trump NR law but you are not the lawmaker nor the law enforcer of
> >
> > Maine.
> > Be careful Sulla, all this talk about how illegal Nova Roma is and one might
> > think you want it disbanded.
> > Di Te Incolumes Custodiant.
> > Nero
> > Nihil Sine Dies
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@>
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 12:00:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> >
> > Nero,
> >
> > That is NOT the case. Maine Law trumps NR law PERIOD.
> >
> > Your rationale, taken to extreme, just to give you a typical strawman
> > argument. Nova Roma decides it wants to re-initiate slavery. We pass a law
> > in the Comita saying Slavery is now legal. Guess what - it is not. Because
> > we are bound by US law and slavery is specifically outlawed. Now that, as I
> > just pointed out is a strawman argument but the principle is just as valid.
> >
> > You create a law that creates two separate classes of citizenship
> > (intentional or not) that discriminates against another body of members -
> > then that is illegal.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Sulla
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Let's not be martyrs.
> > > No one is limiting anyone, I never said that christians should be limited,
> > > however when you agree tot he terms of citizenship you know what is
> > > required of
> > > you when you take public office. NO one is saying that you MUST believe in
> > > the
> > > rituals but you must partake, just like any job who's job description has
> > > something you don't like.
> > > DTIC
> > > Nero.
> > > P.S. Did you ever think that maybe it wan't a limitation of the job but
> > > maybe
> > > that the people they hired were just better suited and qualified?
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@<robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>
> > > >
> > >
> > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 11:03:10 AM
> > >
> > > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > >
> > > If you are limiting Corporate positions to those just of a particular
> > > FAITH,
> > > then yes, that would violate Maine and US law. This is especially true
> > > since Nova Roma is not a religious corporation, but a Public Benefit
> > > Corporation.
> > >
> > > Limiting those positions would be considered Discrimination.
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Sulla
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Riku Demyx
> > ><rikudemyx@<rikudemyx%40yahoo.com>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sulla,
> > > > Does Maine law forbid polytheism? Unless it does I don't see s problem
> > > with
> > > > my
> > > > post.
> > > > DTIC
> > > > Nero
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Robert <robert.woolwine@
> > ><robert.woolwine%40gmail.com><robert.woolwine%
> > > 40gmail.com>>
> > > > To: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>" <
> > > > Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>>
> > > > Cc: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>" <
> > > > Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> <Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>>
> > >
> > > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 10:48:53 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Nero,
> > > >
> > > > You are not including Maine law in your analysis.
> > > >
> > > > Vale
> > > >
> > > > Sulla
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 30, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Riku Demyx
> > > ><rikudemyx@ <rikudemyx%40yahoo.com><rikudemyx%40yahoo.com>>
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Salve,
> > > > > I can see both sides of the religious argument, and yes, the
> > > constitution
> > > > says
> > > >
> > > > > that there is freedom of religion. BUT We also have an official
> > > religion
> > > > which
> > > >
> > > > > is the Religio AND one of the main purposes of the organization is the
> > > > support
> > > >
> > > > > and sanctuary of the Religio.
> > > > > I'm not saying kick the monotheists out, I'm not saying anything of the
> > > > sort.
> > > > > But please do remember that a lot of us came here not just for the
> > > > culture of
> > > > > Rome but her religion as well.
> > > > > DVIC
> > > > > Nero
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: GAIUS MARCIUS CRISPUS
> > > ><jbshr1pwa@ <jbshr1pwa%40btinternet.com><jbshr1pwa%
> > > 40btinternet.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>
> > >
> > > > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 9:49:14 AM
> > > > > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
> > >
> > > > "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > .......fuel the misconception that our dispute in the Senate is between
> > > > > Christians and Cultores Deorum when it is anything but.
> > > > >
> > > > > Salvete omnes
> > > > >
> > > > > Please, citizens, let us not entrench ourselves behind religious
> > > banners
> > > > again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we not just recognise that there are people of all beliefs and
> > > > traditions,
> > > >
> > > > > and none, here, but that at the end of the day we all have one vital
> > > > thing in
> > > > > common, which is why we are all here.
> > > > >
> > > > > We are all roman citizens, and the most important thing for all of us
> > > is
> > > > to
> > > > >work
> > > > >
> > > > > together to heal the problems that are stopping our republic from
> > > > expanding,
> > > > > from moving forwards, from continuing to exist.
> > > > >
> > > > > Lets recognise that, yes there are some differences between us, but
> > > those
> > > >
> > > > >should
> > > > >
> > > > > not be obstacles to working together.
> > > > >
> > > > > All religious wars end badly, if not now then in the future.
> > > > >
> > > > > Lets put our differences aside, and work together, not use up all our
> > > > energy in
> > > > >
> > > > > internecine disputes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Valete optime omnes
> > > > > Crispus
> > > > > "Then none was for a party; then all were for the state".
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Catro Piscino Valerio Poplicolae Marcio Crispo omnibusque in foro SPD

Actually, the reason I call Piscinus a "creature" is simply because he is. So am I. We were all created - whether you think by simple biological processes or by the Divine; we are created beings.

He is also a creature by virtue of the fact that *all* the authority he has is a gift from the People; they created him and he is answerable to them. If the People wanted to, they could strip him of every title and office that he holds, since he only holds them at their pleasure and not by divine right.

It was my subtle - apparently *too* subtle - reminder that Piscinus is not the top of the food chain. He is not a god, nor is he correct simply by fiat. He, like all of us, is a creature, and human.

Valete,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "qvalerius" <q.valerius.poplicola@...> wrote:
>
> Ah, so its not ok to insult you or Hortensia, but it is ok to insult others when the ancient Romans did likewise? Of course not, and it would be hypocritical for you to do so.
>
> (Crispe, does this pass your test?)
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Gualtere
> >
> > And it was necessary for you to explain this why?
> >
> > Can you explain why you allow Cato to call me "creature"? Or why you have allowed Sulla to refer to me as "anti-pope"? Name-calling and insults are apparently permitted by you here, but only by select people.
> >
> > The term "atheist" was applied to Christians and other monotheists by ancient Romans, since they deny the existence of the Gods. Why didn't you explain that part of Maior's statement since she used the term in that sense of meaning? Atheist was applied to Epicurians as well, since, although they paid lipservice to the existence of Gods, they thought of Them as composed of atoms, decomposing through natural processes, and not really doing anything and not caring about human concerns. So although the Epicurians admitted to the existence of Gods, it was that last part that left Epicurians "without gods," or atheists, because they did not believe there could be any interaction with the Gods.
> >
> > Cultores Deorum accept not only the existence of the Gods, but that They walk beside us, live among us, are part of our Civitas. Res Publica refers to public matters, with the Gods included among that public. That is why Romans built edifices for the Gods to reside in while They visited the City. Temples were not churches, the attendants attended the Gods, and others were rarely if ever permitted to enter the sacra aedes.
> >
> > The division in Nova Roma today, or so it seems to me, is between those who wish to maintain the Constitution and keep the Gods as part of our Civitas, and those who would dispense with the Gods. It is not a matter of practicing any other traditions alongside the Religio Romana. But it is an apt description to term as "atheists" those who would exclude the Gods from our affairs.
> >
> > The lines are not drawn between Christians and cultores as sometimes posed, as Christians and cultores are on both sides of the Senate debates. The current Albucius faction includes Cato, Ti. Galerius, Suetonius, and Sulla who may be Christian-monotheists on one side, but they are joined by Palladius, Agrippa, and Gnaeus Caesar who are cultores Deorum. Marinus, Audens and Scholastica are Christian moderates who side with Quintilianus, as do Fr. Apulus and Perusianus (who I think are Christians), while cultores, gentiles, and practioners of all stripes join with Quintilianus too.
> >
> > So your post only helps fuel the misconception that our dispute in the Senate is between Christians and Cultores Deorum when it is anything but.
> >
> > Vale
> > M. Moravius
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gualterus_graecus" <waltms1@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Salvete,
> > >
> > > The most recent comment by Maior, back in July, was to throw the "atheists" out, but under this moniker she included Christians and all monotheists, so Poplicola's comment isn't completely off:
> > >
> > > "Nova Roma will turn into an atheist-monotheism under them!!!" (msg #77536)
> > >
> > > "Sulla, Cato, Albucius and their friends won't stop until the gods
> > > are mocked and their temples empty. Already they are trying to throw out our beloved Pontifex Maximus!
> > >
> > > Cultores it is US. vs them
> > > Nova Roma for the gods and Rome!
> > > Atheists OUT!!!!!" (msg #77516)
> > >
> > > -Gualterus
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "lathyrus77" <lathyrus77@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "qvalerius" <q.valerius.poplicola@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > You're mistaken. I've personally seen posts by Hortensia here attacking Cato *for Christianity*. She even asked one time for all Christians to be kicked out of Nova Roma.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > You're mistaken or lying. No one cares that he's christian. There are a large amount of christians here, and it makes no difference whatsoever. It's his conduct. If anyone cared about his christianity then all the other christians would be attacked as well, and they're not.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > She's never asked for all christians to be kicked out.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -Anna Bucci
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Except no one said piscinus is the top of the food chain, so you're oh so subtle reminder wasn't needed.

and I suspect you used "creature" in a pejorative context.


-Anna Bucci

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Cato" <catoinnyc@...> wrote:
>
> Catro Piscino Valerio Poplicolae Marcio Crispo omnibusque in foro SPD
>
> Actually, the reason I call Piscinus a "creature" is simply because he is. So am I. We were all created - whether you think by simple biological processes or by the Divine; we are created beings.
>
> He is also a creature by virtue of the fact that *all* the authority he has is a gift from the People; they created him and he is answerable to them. If the People wanted to, they could strip him of every title and office that he holds, since he only holds them at their pleasure and not by divine right.
>
> It was my subtle - apparently *too* subtle - reminder that Piscinus is not the top of the food chain. He is not a god, nor is he correct simply by fiat. He, like all of us, is a creature, and human.
>
> Valete,

I think he's using it as an example of a non-religious institution being allowed to discriminate.


-Anna Bucci

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaea Livia Ocella" <lbciddio@...> wrote:
>
> With all due respect, Nero, I don't think many Nova Roman citizens have any sway in what the U.S. Army does. If what they do is wrong, as you seem to believe (I agree, in some cases), then why are you using that as some sort of justification for what other people think is wrong? Judging from some of the other discussions in which you have participated, you are above such faulty logic.
>
> Also - please always have pride in being a cultor!! You should take that pride with you everywhere, not just in dealings with NR.
>

Salve Livia;
I'm in total agreement, let's divinize him. It's so Roman! I wonder if someone has translated 'Imagine' into latin, that would be so great.
O dive Lennone nobis favet!
Maior

> We should immediately start a procedure for the deification of John Lennon,
> if he's not a god yet.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cato" <catoinnyc@>
> To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 8:59 AM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
>
>
> Cato Maiori sal.
>
> You should only use quotation marks if you're going to quote the actual
> lyrics, not make up insipid fantasies.
>
> John Lennon is not a god, by the way.
>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rory12001" <rory12001@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Anna;
> > all I can think of now is John Lennon's 'Imagine'
> >
> > "Imagine no incessant hating
> > I wonder if you can
> >
> > Imagine all the people
> > being civil on the ML for today...
> >
> > You may say I'm a dreamer
> > But I'm not the only one
> > I hope someday you'll join us
> > And as Romans we'll live as one"
> >
> > Divus Johannes Lennonus!
> > M. Hortensia Maior
> >
> > :
> > >
> > > The creature.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Like I said before, haters gotta hate.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Anna Bucci
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Cato" <catoinnyc@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Cato Iunio Neroni sal.
> > > >
> > > > Here - amazingly - in one respect Maior is correct. Anyone can take
> > > > private auspices for themselves.
> > > >
> > > > To take the auspices for the *State*, however, is the domain of the
> > > > curule magistrates and, if there is a gap in those magistracies, the
> > > > right reverts to the patricians in the Senate. That is the ancient
> > > > Roman way.
> > > >
> > > > It is not nearly as complex as some would have us think, however; in
> > > > Livy we have a quite clear description of how auspices were taken.
> > > >
> > > > Much of the complexity we have been stuck with is borne of erroneous
> > > > and inaccurate understandings of what the processes were and the
> > > > sources we have for them *and* the scholarship surrounding them - and
> > > > a grossly inflated sense of power and authority assumed by the
> > > > creature in the chair of the pontifex maximus. Gualterus Graecus
> > > > explained much of this in several posts in July, which are well worth
> > > > re-reading.
> > > >
> > > > Vale,
> > > >
> > > > Cato
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rory12001" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Salve Nero;
> > > > > here is link to a stub on augurs
> > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Augur
> > > > >
> > > > > In ancient Rome to become an augur was the greatest height a Roman
> > > > > could aspire to; Cicero was an augur. They were state religious
> > > > > specialists on divination. It's an extremely complex subject that
> > > > > demands a lot of study. And here is a reading list
> > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Reading_list_for_the_cultus_deorum#Religion_and_Law
> > > > >
> > > > > Everyday Romans observed signs & took auspices about their own
> > > > > affairs. These are personal or private auspices. I can, you can,
> > > > > everyone can take personal auspices.
> > > > > So working on the concept of empowering cultores, we want people to
> > > > > learn how to do this. I don't want to become a state augur, but if
> > > > > you aspire to this post; start studying now;-)
> > > > > optime vale
> > > > > Maior
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Salve,
> > > > > > I am not trying to start fighting (everything said anymore leads
> > > > > > to conflict),
> > > > > > but do you want to learn auspices so that any one of us can be
> > > > > > ready to take an
> > > > > > augurs chair? Or is this for personal use? Just curious:)
> > > > > > DTIC
> > > > > > Nero.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > > From: rory12001 <rory12001@>
> > > > > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > > Sent: Sun, August 29, 2010 9:44:56 PM
> > > > > > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > M. Hortensia P Corvae spd;
> > > > > > you asked the most imporant questions Nova Roma can ask of itself;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. What is Nova Roma?
> > > > > > a non-profit
> > > > > > a vision to restore Roman culture and religio
> > > > > > a re-enactor group
> > > > > > a study group
> > > > > > something else
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For myself it is the vision. At the upcoming conventus, we will
> > > > > > learn how to
> > > > > > take personal auspices. This is something I want to do for myself
> > > > > > and for other
> > > > > > cultores.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it's great to ask these questions. I think a great deal of
> > > > > > dysfunction in Nova
> > > > > > Roma is due to conflicting ideas of what Nova Roma is.. Having
> > > > > > open civil
> > > > > > discussions helps clarify our problems and find ways to resolve
> > > > > > them.
> > > > > > optime vale
> > > > > > Maior
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I guess my real issue is that nowhere else in our daily lives do
> > > > > > > we seek or
> > > > > > >expect auspices to be taken before necessary organizational
> > > > > > >business can be
> > > > > > >conducted. >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > "Does our organization need this? Does this or that thing enable
> > > > > > our
> > > > > > organization to function more smoothly and efficiently?"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That is really what I would like to see the Senate examine
> > > > > > > closely.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Salve, et gratias,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Paulla
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rory12001" <rory12001@>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Salve Corva;
> > > > > > > > let me explain Rome was founded by augury, it is the most
> > > > > > > > venerated aspect
> > > > > > >of the religio romana. NR always has had augurs to take the
> > > > > > >auspices.
> > > > > > > > Until Albucius the augurs never had a problem with
> > > > > > > > officials, the officials
> > > > > > >wrote to the augurs (they do have lives) requesting them to take
> > > > > > >auspices & gave
> > > > > > >them a series of dates..
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No problem. I know our augurs; the PM Piscinus, the censor
> > > > > > > > K.Fabius Modianus,
> > > > > > >and M. Lucretius Agricola who journeyed from Japan to Sarmatia to
> > > > > > >take the
> > > > > > >auspices for the weddings. They are devoted and take it
> > > > > > >seriously.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Vale Seneca,
                     I just signed up, look forward to more direct contact with our fellow Nova Romanii.
                                Vale Lupus.


Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use





.










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I thought we were scrapping don't ask don't tell? Has that not gone through yet?

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "lathyrus77" <lathyrus77@...> wrote:
>
> I think he's using it as an example of a non-religious institution being allowed to discriminate.
>
>
> -Anna Bucci
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaea Livia Ocella" <lbciddio@> wrote:
> >
> > With all due respect, Nero, I don't think many Nova Roman citizens have any sway in what the U.S. Army does. If what they do is wrong, as you seem to believe (I agree, in some cases), then why are you using that as some sort of justification for what other people think is wrong? Judging from some of the other discussions in which you have participated, you are above such faulty logic.
> >
> > Also - please always have pride in being a cultor!! You should take that pride with you everywhere, not just in dealings with NR.
> >
>

Salve amice.

Yes it is being repealed, but the amendment won't likely be in force until 2011 given the remaining stages it has to go through.

Vale bene
Caesar

--- On Mon, 8/30/10, qvalerius <q.valerius.poplicola@...> wrote:

> From: qvalerius <q.valerius.poplicola@...>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 3:19 PM
> I thought we were scrapping don't ask
> don't tell? Has that not gone through yet?
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com,
> "lathyrus77" <lathyrus77@...> wrote:
> >
> > I think he's using it as an example of a non-religious
> institution being allowed to discriminate.

Salve Marcellus, I too don't like the idea of splitting NR into separate factions, Strength through Unity and all. Maybe a cross the board amnesty could be called where all old wrongs could be buried, a little of Caesars famous clemency wouldn't be amiss right about now.
       Vale Lupus.

--- On Thu, 26/8/10, James V Hooper <warrior44_us@...> wrote:


From: James V Hooper <warrior44_us@...>
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: the partitioning of Nova Roma.
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, 26 August, 2010, 20:39


 



Salve Omnes,

I understand the need of some groups to have a "space" of their own, but I am
not in favor of partitioning Nova Roma. History tells us that when The Roman
Empire was divided into east and west, it was the begining of the end.
Citizens who want their own groups, should be allowed to form them, but I
think this republic of ours is large enough to embrace that ideal without
breaking away from the main group.
Only one mans opinion...

Vale, C. Pompeius Marcellus

On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 04:21:36 -0000
"petronius_dexter" <jfarnoud94@...> wrote:
> Ave,
>
> The dissolution was already proposed in ancient Roma but did not work. I
>think that it is a false good idea.
>
> Why a such dissolution? Division of the treasury in two equal parts, with
>many citizens who would be in the both Novae Romae.
>
> This division need is only political and seems to me a stupidity. If the
>hybris of one man who wants to be the master of NR is the cause of this
>division, you will have the same problem with two Novae Romae. Instead of one
>master, you will have two masters with new need of divisions into each future
>Nova Roma and then we will have 4 Novae Romae, and so on...
>
> If someone is not happy here he can quit.
>
> Valete.
>
> C. Petronius Dexter
> Tribunus Plebis Arcoiali scribebat
> a. d. VII Kalendas Septembres P. Memmio K. Fabio II coss.
>











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Peoples Front of Nova Roma...Splitters ! :)

--- On Thu, 26/8/10, lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...> wrote:


From: lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: the partitioning of Nova Roma.
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, 26 August, 2010, 23:27


 




Regarding NR names for the new groups, I dislike one group being regarded as original, and foundational, while the other is regarded as reformational, or revolutionary. As if one side were rebelling against the establishment. This is not a revolt, it's a separation.

And for those who dislike division, perhaps after some time apart the two sides can be reunited.

Some names I've thought up for new nova roman orgs:

Nova Roman People's Front
People's Front of Nova Roma
Nova Roman Popular People's Front
Popular Front of Nova Roma
Campaign for a Free Nova Roma

-Anna Bucci

AKA Annia Minucia Marcella











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

C. Maria Caeca Cn. Cornelio Lentulo Pontifex S. P. D.

Welcome back ...and it sounds like you had a wonderful weekend! Now, I must ...try not to think about how much I love mountains or how much I would love to be tucked away in a lovely little mountain valley!

Vale quam Optime,
C. Maria Caeca

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete omnes,
I was simply showing that there is discrimination everywhere even in the
government.
DVIC
Nero



________________________________
From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 3:31:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica


Salve amice.

Yes it is being repealed, but the amendment won't likely be in force until 2011
given the remaining stages it has to go through.

Vale bene
Caesar

--- On Mon, 8/30/10, qvalerius <q.valerius.poplicola@...> wrote:

> From: qvalerius <q.valerius.poplicola@...>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 3:19 PM
> I thought we were scrapping don't ask
> don't tell? Has that not gone through yet?
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com,
> "lathyrus77" <lathyrus77@...> wrote:
> >
> > I think he's using it as an example of a non-religious
> institution being allowed to discriminate.







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On 8/30/2010 4:24 PM, Riku Demyx wrote:

>
> Salvete omnes,
> I was simply showing that there is discrimination everywhere even in the
> government.
> DVIC
> Nero
>

The problem with the analogy is that the American military isn't the
same as a corporation or any other organization under our system. When
you join the Army, you basically sign away your rights - you get to keep
the 2nd amendment, but that's about it.

Aside from that, banning gays from serving in the military, while legal,
was still immoral. Discrimination is wrong.

Vale,
Seneca



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Nero

Indeed there is discrimination, but in the case of the US armed forces it was legal. The morality of it of course is another question. Nova Roma doesn't have, nor likely never will have the sort of clout necessary to be exempt under a specific law, therefore we simply must strive to ensure that we are fully compliant with Maine state law and Federal US law.

We should be seeking ways to balance out the two requirements of macronational law and our own internal by-laws. In cases where the two conflict NR's laws will of course always lose and have to take second place. The trick should be to find a mechanism that satisfies both.

As to whether I would want to see such disrimination in NR, even if it was legal, the answer is no. Discrimination as I think Seneca just said in another post ont his thread is wrong, and also counter productive in the long run in respect of growth (assuming we ever have any of significance).

If you have a few hours spare ;) have a read of this (it is in the files section of this list accessible by going to the Yahoo home page for this group). It comprises of some ideas of mine how we may have our cake and eat it. Hopefully the link works.
 
http://tinyurl.com/28azu2g
 
If it doesn't the name of the file in the Files section is NovaRomaReborn.pdf. Many of our structural problems and the incessant conflicts between bylaw and state law can be solved. Religious issues might even be lessened if the actual structure started to work as oppose to be stuck in this continuing clash of legal priorities.

Vale bene
Cn. Iulius Caesar
 

--- On Mon, 8/30/10, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@...> wrote:

> From: Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@...>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 4:24 PM
> Salvete omnes,
> I was simply showing that there is discrimination
> everywhere even in the
> government.
> DVIC
> Nero
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...>
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 3:31:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
>
>  
> Salve amice.
>
> Yes it is being repealed, but the amendment won't likely be
> in force until 2011
> given the remaining stages it has to go through.
>
> Vale bene
> Caesar
>
> --- On Mon, 8/30/10, qvalerius <q.valerius.poplicola@...>
> wrote:
>
> > From: qvalerius <q.valerius.poplicola@...>
> > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 3:19 PM
> > I thought we were scrapping don't ask
> > don't tell? Has that not gone through yet?
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com,
> > "lathyrus77" <lathyrus77@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think he's using it as an example of a
> non-religious
> > institution being allowed to discriminate.
>
>
>
>
>
>      
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>     Nova-Roma-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Am I the only one that thinks this whole discrimination discussion is moot? NR doesn't have any laws discriminating against christians.


The only discrimination I can think of here is that only females can be vestals.



-Anna Bucci

Maior Neroni spd;

we're a registered 501(c)(3) with the IRS read here:
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html

Nova Roma was granted this status for education and religion. We're a private organization, we can make our requirements for citizenship whatever we want. We can change our by-laws to admit or omit whomever we wish.

Orgs that receive Federal funding have to deal with gov and state discrimination laws. We don't get any gov't funding. So it's not an issue.

Non-cultores can't be religious officials, that would be mocking/defaming the gods and IV. A
" Magistrates, Senators, and citizens need not be practitioners of the Religio Romana, but may not engage in any activity that intentionally blasphemes or defames the Gods, the Religio Romana, or its practitioners."
http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Current_constitution_(Nova_Roma)

But this is typical dysfunction I was talking about. Don't waste your time with Cato or Sulla. They threaten to sue but it's all empty talk.
A joke.
vale
Maior



We are a public,

> non-profit organization incorporated under the laws of the United States and the
> State of Maine.
>
> As such, we are subject to all US laws regarding discrimination. If that were
> somehow not enough, *our own by-laws* guarantees our citizens freedom from
> discrimination based on "ethnic heritage, gender, religious affiliation, or
> sexual orientation", so any attempt to make any public office - magistracies,
> priesthoods, the Senate - somehow unobtainable by *any* citizen because of their religious affiliation is illegal.
>
> And just FYI, the Maine Non Profit Corporation Act (Title 13-B) *specifically
> excludes* religious entities such as "parishes", "local churches", etc.
>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rory12001" <rory12001@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Nero;
> > please don't listen to Sulla or Cato when they discuss current U.S. laws; they know nothing about them.
> >
> > Of course churches, temples, non-profits that support a particular religion can limit themselves. there are Catholic, Jewish orgs etc.. So can private clubs. Freedom of association is a U.S. Constitutional right. Even groups like the traditional Masons or golf clubs can forbid women. It's where institutions serve the public that they can't discriminate.
> >
> > Anyway moving on, it's really not a religious discussion. It's Sulla, Cato, & their cronies from the BA vs. the rest of us. They have cultores there; 2 pontifices in fact: Fabius Maximus and Metellus. But they prefer fighting to doing anything positive.
> >
> >
> > I see them as people who are in Nova Roma and vent a great deal of hostility when they really need therapy. It's sad, and I do feel for them. But their problems are not my or anyone else's here's responsability.
> >
> > Anyway Nero I do hope you can come to the Conventus in October, it will be great and a peaceful fun event!
> > optime vale
> > Maior
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Let's not be martyrs.
> > > No one is limiting anyone, I never said that christians should be limited,
> > > however when you agree tot he terms of citizenship you know what is required of
> > > you when you take public office. NO one is saying that you MUST believe in the
> > > rituals but you must partake, just like any job who's job description has
> > > something you don't like.
> > > DTIC
> > > Nero.
> > > P.S. Did you ever think that maybe it wan't a limitation of the job but maybe
> > > that the people they hired were just better suited and qualified?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@>
> > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 11:03:10 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > >
> > > If you are limiting Corporate positions to those just of a particular FAITH,
> > > then yes, that would violate Maine and US law. This is especially true
> > > since Nova Roma is not a religious corporation, but a Public Benefit
> > > Corporation.
> > >
> > > Limiting those positions would be considered Discrimination.
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Sulla
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sulla,
> > > > Does Maine law forbid polytheism? Unless it does I don't see s problem with
> > > > my
> > > > post.
> > > > DTIC
> > > > Nero
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Robert <robert.woolwine@ <robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>>
> > > > To: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>" <
> > > > Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>>
> > > > Cc: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>" <
> > > > Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>>
> > > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 10:48:53 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Nero,
> > > >
> > > > You are not including Maine law in your analysis.
> > > >
> > > > Vale
> > > >
> > > > Sulla
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 30, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Riku Demyx
> > > ><rikudemyx@<rikudemyx%40yahoo.com>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Salve,
> > > > > I can see both sides of the religious argument, and yes, the constitution
> > > > says
> > > >
> > > > > that there is freedom of religion. BUT We also have an official religion
> > > > which
> > > >
> > > > > is the Religio AND one of the main purposes of the organization is the
> > > > support
> > > >
> > > > > and sanctuary of the Religio.
> > > > > I'm not saying kick the monotheists out, I'm not saying anything of the
> > > > sort.
> > > > > But please do remember that a lot of us came here not just for the
> > > > culture of
> > > > > Rome but her religion as well.
> > > > > DVIC
> > > > > Nero
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: GAIUS MARCIUS CRISPUS
> > > ><jbshr1pwa@<jbshr1pwa%40btinternet.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 9:49:14 AM
> > > > > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > > "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > .......fuel the misconception that our dispute in the Senate is between
> > > > > Christians and Cultores Deorum when it is anything but.
> > > > >
> > > > > Salvete omnes
> > > > >
> > > > > Please, citizens, let us not entrench ourselves behind religious banners
> > > > again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we not just recognise that there are people of all beliefs and
> > > > traditions,
> > > >
> > > > > and none, here, but that at the end of the day we all have one vital
> > > > thing in
> > > > > common, which is why we are all here.
> > > > >
> > > > > We are all roman citizens, and the most important thing for all of us is
> > > > to
> > > > >work
> > > > >
> > > > > together to heal the problems that are stopping our republic from
> > > > expanding,
> > > > > from moving forwards, from continuing to exist.
> > > > >
> > > > > Lets recognise that, yes there are some differences between us, but those
> > > >
> > > > >should
> > > > >
> > > > > not be obstacles to working together.
> > > > >
> > > > > All religious wars end badly, if not now then in the future.
> > > > >
> > > > > Lets put our differences aside, and work together, not use up all our
> > > > energy in
> > > > >
> > > > > internecine disputes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Valete optime omnes
> > > > > Crispus
> > > > > "Then none was for a party; then all were for the state".
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>

Salve Annia
 
If there exists even the slightest suggestion that it has been proposed and/or maybe proposed in the future on the basis of stements made regarding augural practise, that Christians and other non-cultors should be excluded from augural duties, the answer is no I don't think it is moot.
 
The involvement of non-cultors in augral duties has been raised often before. Excluding them would be viewed by a number of people as discrimination, but more importantly the question is would it be discrimination under state law. If the answer were yes, or even the possibility that it would be yes, then clearly that affects the corporation and must be of concern to all, especially the BoD/Senate.
 
Vale bene
Caesar

--- On Mon, 8/30/10, lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...> wrote:


From: lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 5:10 PM


Am I the only one that thinks this whole discrimination discussion is moot? NR doesn't have any laws discriminating against christians.


The only discrimination I can think of here is that only females can be vestals.



-Anna Bucci



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Anna;
how foolish..... under what title will Caesar sue? I'd love to see him quote it.
He's a former cop and threatens but never produces the law that's been violated.
vale
Maior

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Annia
>  
> If there exists even the slightest suggestion that it has been proposed and/or maybe proposed in the future on the basis of stements made regarding augural practise, that Christians and other non-cultors should be excluded from augural duties, the answer is no I don't think it is moot.
>  
> The involvement of non-cultors in augral duties has been raised often before. Excluding them would be viewed by a number of people as discrimination, but more importantly the question is would it be discrimination under state law. If the answer were yes, or even the possibility that it would be yes, then clearly that affects the corporation and must be of concern to all, especially the BoD/Senate.
>  
> Vale bene
> Caesar
>
> --- On Mon, 8/30/10, lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 5:10 PM
>
>
> Am I the only one that thinks this whole discrimination discussion is moot? NR doesn't have any laws discriminating against christians.
>
>
> The only discrimination I can think of here is that only females can be vestals.
>
>
>
> -Anna Bucci
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Maior and YOU want to dissolve the corporation! You want to end NR.

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 4:34 PM, rory12001 <rory12001@...> wrote:

>
>
> Salve Anna;
> how foolish..... under what title will Caesar sue? I'd love to see him
> quote it.
> He's a former cop and threatens but never produces the law that's been
> violated.
> vale
> Maior
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Gnaeus
> Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Annia
> >
> > If there exists even the slightest suggestion that it has been proposed
> and/or maybe proposed in the future on the basis of stements made regarding
> augural practise, that Christians and other non-cultors should be excluded
> from augural duties, the answer is no I don't think it is moot.
> >
> > The involvement of non-cultors in augral duties has been raised often
> before. Excluding them would be viewed by a number of people as
> discrimination, but more importantly the question is would it be
> discrimination under state law. If the answer were yes, or even the
> possibility that it would be yes, then clearly that affects the corporation
> and must be of concern to all, especially the BoD/Senate.
> >
> > Vale bene
> > Caesar
> >
> > --- On Mon, 8/30/10, lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...>
>
> > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 5:10 PM
> >
> >
> > Am I the only one that thinks this whole discrimination discussion is
> moot? NR doesn't have any laws discriminating against christians.
> >
> >
> > The only discrimination I can think of here is that only females can be
> vestals.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Anna Bucci
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
> Salve Annia
>  
> If there exists even the slightest suggestion that it has been proposed and/or maybe proposed in the future on the basis of stements made regarding augural practise, that Christians and other non-cultors should be excluded from augural duties, the answer is no I don't think it is moot.
>  

It is moot, since I doubt the person suggesting it is a dictator. And I doubt those that would be discriminated against would ever vote for it.


All this is doing is fueling the argument of christians vs pagans. An idiotic discussion for alarmists, that repeats itself over and over again with nothing productive coming from it. It's mental masturbation.


It would be like arguing whether or not NR's military should take over other countries. Regardless if this would be legal, or practical, NR doesn't have an army. It's an absurd argument.


Shall we argue all the other possible hypotheticals that may arise in NR? to what end and what purpose?


Maior points out ancient romans were able to expell christians, and alarmists take this to mean Maior wants NR to expell all christians. I think some of you are being hypersensitive and are clamouring for anything to fight about.


Oh no, I mention christian in an email, let's fight about christians being persecuted!!! This is ridiculous.


how about we expell all those who threaten to sue NR? That would be a more interesting topic to discuss.

Salve Maior
 
In your rush to type I think you must have missed the fact that I never mentioned suing you, or anyone.
 
In too much of a rush again to consider what to write before you start typing?
 
Vale
Caesar

--- On Mon, 8/30/10, rory12001 <rory12001@...> wrote:


From: rory12001 <rory12001@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 5:34 PM


Salve Anna;
  how foolish..... under what title will Caesar sue? I'd love to see him quote it.
   He's a former cop and threatens but never produces the law that's been violated.
                    vale
                      Maior

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Annia
>  
> If there exists even the slightest suggestion that it has been proposed and/or maybe proposed in the future on the basis of stements made regarding augural practise, that Christians and other non-cultors should be excluded from augural duties, the answer is no I don't think it is moot.
>  
> The involvement of non-cultors in augral duties has been raised often before. Excluding them would be viewed by a number of people as discrimination, but more importantly the question is would it be discrimination under state law. If the answer were yes, or even the possibility that it would be yes, then clearly that affects the corporation and must be of concern to all, especially the BoD/Senate.
>  
> Vale bene
> Caesar
>
> --- On Mon, 8/30/10, lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 5:10 PM
>
>
> Am I the only one that thinks this whole discrimination discussion is moot? NR doesn't have any laws discriminating against christians.
>
>
> The only discrimination I can think of here is that only females can be vestals.
>
>
>
> -Anna Bucci
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Caesar,

That is because Maior will do anything she can to try to get her point
across regardless if it is true or accurate. If she believes it, then it
MUST be true. The facts be damned!

Vale,

Sulla

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 4:42 PM, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <
gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
>
> Salve Maior
>
> In your rush to type I think you must have missed the fact that I never
> mentioned suing you, or anyone.
>
> In too much of a rush again to consider what to write before you start
> typing?
>
> Vale
> Caesar
>
> --- On Mon, 8/30/10, rory12001 <rory12001@...<rory12001%40yahoo.com>>
> wrote:
>
> From: rory12001 <rory12001@... <rory12001%40yahoo.com>>
>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 5:34 PM
>
>
> Salve Anna;
> how foolish..... under what title will Caesar sue? I'd love to see him
> quote it.
> He's a former cop and threatens but never produces the law that's been
> violated.
> vale
> Maior
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Gnaeus
> Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Annia
> >
> > If there exists even the slightest suggestion that it has been proposed
> and/or maybe proposed in the future on the basis of stements made regarding
> augural practise, that Christians and other non-cultors should be excluded
> from augural duties, the answer is no I don't think it is moot.
> >
> > The involvement of non-cultors in augral duties has been raised often
> before. Excluding them would be viewed by a number of people as
> discrimination, but more importantly the question is would it be
> discrimination under state law. If the answer were yes, or even the
> possibility that it would be yes, then clearly that affects the corporation
> and must be of concern to all, especially the BoD/Senate.
> >
> > Vale bene
> > Caesar
> >
> > --- On Mon, 8/30/10, lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...>
> > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 5:10 PM
> >
> >
> > Am I the only one that thinks this whole discrimination discussion is
> moot? NR doesn't have any laws discriminating against christians.
> >
> >
> > The only discrimination I can think of here is that only females can be
> vestals.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Anna Bucci
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...> wrote:

>
> Maior and YOU want to dissolve the corporation! You want to end NR.
>

I wouldn't mind NR dissolving itself and starting anew with new NR orgs. It'll solve most of the problems that repeat itself here. Sulla can be a dictator of his own faction if he wants, and the rest of us won't have to deal with it. I'd be able to rejoin and participate with becoming frustrated and without the fear of being sued.


It's the best idea I've heard to solve these problems.

Salve Annia.

Decisions on augural policy wouldn't see the light of a comitia vote, being held to be the domain of the CA. It is entirely possible that these changes could be made.
 
As to the rest of your post, well the charge of mental stimualtion could have been laid many times against you and your threads and issues, so I rather suppose it is all in the eye of the beholder and the author.
 
Vale bene
Caesar

--- On Mon, 8/30/10, lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...> wrote:


From: lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 5:42 PM




--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Annia
>  
> If there exists even the slightest suggestion that it has been proposed and/or maybe proposed in the future on the basis of stements made regarding augural practise, that Christians and other non-cultors should be excluded from augural duties, the answer is no I don't think it is moot.
>  


It is moot, since I doubt the person suggesting it is a dictator. And I doubt those that would be discriminated against would ever vote for it.


All this is doing is fueling the argument of christians vs pagans. An idiotic discussion for alarmists, that repeats itself over and over again with nothing productive coming from it. It's mental masturbation.


It would be like arguing whether or not NR's military should take over other countries. Regardless if this would be legal, or practical, NR doesn't have an army. It's an absurd argument.


Shall we argue all the other possible hypotheticals that may arise in NR? to what end and what purpose?


Maior points out ancient romans were able to expell christians, and alarmists take this to mean Maior wants NR to expell all christians. I think some of you are being hypersensitive and are clamouring for anything to fight about.


Oh no, I mention christian in an email, let's fight about christians being persecuted!!! This is ridiculous.


how about we expell all those who threaten to sue NR? That would be a more interesting topic to discuss.





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...> wrote:

>
> Caesar,
>
> That is because Maior will do anything she can to try to get her point
> across regardless if it is true or accurate. If she believes it, then it
> MUST be true. The facts be damned!
>

wow irony. Sulla describes himself.


-Anna Bucci

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
> Salve Annia.
>
> Decisions on augural policy wouldn't see the light of a comitia vote, being held to be the domain of the CA. It is entirely possible that these changes could be made.
>  

I thought you were talking about maior wanting NR to expell christians.

> As to the rest of your post, well the charge of mental stimualtion could have been laid many times against you and your threads and issues, so I rather suppose it is all in the eye of the beholder and the author.
>  

yes it could have, but it wouldn't be accurate.

Salvete omnes;

"When we assumed the soldier ['s duties] we did not lay aside the
citizen," from then Gen. George Washington's June 26, 1775, letter to
the Provincial Congress...

I am a veteran, as is my wife, as are many of our closest friends.
Machinatirix and I have both seen combat.

When I raised my hand (in 1975 for the Guard and in 1983 for the
Reserve) to take the Oath to Protect and Defend the Constitution of
the United States, I did not give up any of my Gods' given rights as a
freeborn man. However, I accepted a very large brake upon my liberty
to exercise those rights.

I was not free to speak every thought I had, and could be disciplined
for wrong expressions, in uniform.

I was not free to bear weapons everywhere I pleased, nor even have
them in my possession sometimes.

I was free to attend chapel, or perform "fatigue" duties.

I did not get up when I wanted, wear what I wanted nor ate what I wanted.

I accepted that others were in authority over me, up to and including
sending me to my death, lawfully.

Those who have not borne that burden, know squat.

mea sententia - Venator

Salve Annia
 
Maior is irrelevant at the best of times and that outburst for which she apologised for (stilted and largely unbelievable to many but still an apology ) is even less relevant, other than that outburst highlights her inner thoughts. That is only relevant because she has a degree of influence (the extent seems to vary according to who you talk to - or possibly how much intoxicating liquor they have consumed when they admit she has influence) within the current group/faction/cabal/whatever that controls most of the magistracies.
 
No, Maior is not by concern in this thread. My concern is that the question of non-cultors performing augury has been discussed here by the PM. This has been an issue for a number of years. You were around the last time it surfaced. Changes could be easily made by the CA which discriminated and that is my issue, not what Maior spouts, which is entertaining but nothing more. The leaglity of such changes under macronational law is the issue.
 
Vale bene
Caesar

--- On Mon, 8/30/10, lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...> wrote:


From: lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 5:52 PM




--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Annia.
>
> Decisions on augural policy wouldn't see the light of a comitia vote, being held to be the domain of the CA. It is entirely possible that these changes could be made.
>  

I thought you were talking about maior wanting NR to expell christians.



> As to the rest of your post, well the charge of mental stimualtion could have been laid many times against you and your threads and issues, so I rather suppose it is all in the eye of the beholder and the author.
>  

yes it could have, but it wouldn't be accurate.





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

good post, Venator. You sum it up quite nicely.


-Anna Bucci
(US Army, 1999-2002)

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Publius Ullerius Stephanus Venator <famila.ulleria.venii@...> wrote:
>
> Salvete omnes;
>
> "When we assumed the soldier ['s duties] we did not lay aside the
> citizen," from then Gen. George Washington's June 26, 1775, letter to
> the Provincial Congress...
>
> I am a veteran, as is my wife, as are many of our closest friends.
> Machinatirix and I have both seen combat.
>
> When I raised my hand (in 1975 for the Guard and in 1983 for the
> Reserve) to take the Oath to Protect and Defend the Constitution of
> the United States, I did not give up any of my Gods' given rights as a
> freeborn man. However, I accepted a very large brake upon my liberty
> to exercise those rights.
>
> I was not free to speak every thought I had, and could be disciplined
> for wrong expressions, in uniform.
>
> I was not free to bear weapons everywhere I pleased, nor even have
> them in my possession sometimes.
>
> I was free to attend chapel, or perform "fatigue" duties.
>
> I did not get up when I wanted, wear what I wanted nor ate what I wanted.
>
> I accepted that others were in authority over me, up to and including
> sending me to my death, lawfully.
>
> Those who have not borne that burden, know squat.
>
> mea sententia - Venator
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
> Salve Annia
>  
> Maior is irrelevant at the best of times and that outburst for which she apologised for (stilted and largely unbelievable to many but still an apology ) is even less relevant, other than that outburst highlights her inner thoughts. That is only relevant because she has a degree of influence (the extent seems to vary according to who you talk to - or possibly how much intoxicating liquor they have consumed when they admit she has influence) within the current group/faction/cabal/whatever that controls most of the magistracies.
>  
> No, Maior is not by concern in this thread. My concern is that the question of non-cultors performing augury has been discussed here by the PM. This has been an issue for a number of years. You were around the last time it surfaced. Changes could be easily made by the CA which discriminated and that is my issue, not what Maior spouts, which is entertaining but nothing more. The leaglity of such changes under macronational law is the issue.
>  
> Vale bene
> Caesar
>

My thoughts on magistrates who aren't pagan or religiously plural would be betraying their own faith or non-belief if the perform roman religious rites. It is a conflict between them and their god(or them and their conscience). And I don't really care as long as they perform their duties as expected.


If they whine or complain about having to do pagan rites which would be against their beliefs, that's when I'd be upset about it. None done this to my knowledge.

I've said this before. We are all repeating ourselves. Again.


-Anna Bucci

Salve,
Well I'd love for the chance to fight and defend my country, but Gods forbid a
gay man get's in on the straight army. We might see a straight man naked. :O



________________________________
From: Publius Ullerius Stephanus Venator <famila.ulleria.venii@...>
To: NR-Main List <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 5:57:34 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Military versus Liberty...


Salvete omnes;

"When we assumed the soldier ['s duties] we did not lay aside the
citizen," from then Gen. George Washington's June 26, 1775, letter to
the Provincial Congress...

I am a veteran, as is my wife, as are many of our closest friends.
Machinatirix and I have both seen combat.

When I raised my hand (in 1975 for the Guard and in 1983 for the
Reserve) to take the Oath to Protect and Defend the Constitution of
the United States, I did not give up any of my Gods' given rights as a
freeborn man. However, I accepted a very large brake upon my liberty
to exercise those rights.

I was not free to speak every thought I had, and could be disciplined
for wrong expressions, in uniform.

I was not free to bear weapons everywhere I pleased, nor even have
them in my possession sometimes.

I was free to attend chapel, or perform "fatigue" duties.

I did not get up when I wanted, wear what I wanted nor ate what I wanted.

I accepted that others were in authority over me, up to and including
sending me to my death, lawfully.

Those who have not borne that burden, know squat.

mea sententia - Venator






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Annia
 
I would agree with you, as long as they perform them that is fine, or of course have them performed if their beliefs are an issue. My point is we shouldn't move to preventing them having that choice. Maybe they can reconcile it all. Frankly that is for them, as you seem to say too, all that matters is the ritual is completed, but don't take that right to choose away from them.

As to repeating ourselves, well of course. This is Nova Roma and until a number of issues are resolved one way or another they are bound to crop up every so often (or more).
 
Vale bene
Caesar

--- On Mon, 8/30/10, lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...> wrote:


From: lathyrus77 <lathyrus77@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 6:07 PM




--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Annia
>  
> Maior is irrelevant at the best of times and that outburst for which she apologised for (stilted and largely unbelievable to many but still an apology ) is even less relevant, other than that outburst highlights her inner thoughts. That is only relevant because she has a degree of influence (the extent seems to vary according to who you talk to - or possibly how much intoxicating liquor they have consumed when they admit she has influence) within the current group/faction/cabal/whatever that controls most of the magistracies.
>  
> No, Maior is not by concern in this thread. My concern is that the question of non-cultors performing augury has been discussed here by the PM. This has been an issue for a number of years. You were around the last time it surfaced. Changes could be easily made by the CA which discriminated and that is my issue, not what Maior spouts, which is entertaining but nothing more. The leaglity of such changes under macronational law is the issue.
>  
> Vale bene
> Caesar
>



My thoughts on magistrates who aren't pagan or religiously plural would be betraying their own faith or non-belief if the perform roman religious rites. It is a conflict between them and their god(or them and their conscience). And I don't really care as long as they perform their duties as expected.


If they whine or complain about having to do pagan rites which would be against their beliefs, that's when I'd be upset about it. None done this to my knowledge.

I've said this before. We are all repeating ourselves. Again.


-Anna Bucci



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

There are a ton of gay people in the miltary. And bi too.


-Anna Bucci

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Riku Demyx <rikudemyx@...> wrote:
>
> Salve,
> Well I'd love for the chance to fight and defend my country, but Gods forbid a
> gay man get's in on the straight army. We might see a straight man naked. :O
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Publius Ullerius Stephanus Venator <famila.ulleria.venii@...>
> To: NR-Main List <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 5:57:34 PM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Military versus Liberty...
>
>
> Salvete omnes;
>
> "When we assumed the soldier ['s duties] we did not lay aside the
> citizen," from then Gen. George Washington's June 26, 1775, letter to
> the Provincial Congress...
>
> I am a veteran, as is my wife, as are many of our closest friends.
> Machinatirix and I have both seen combat.
>
> When I raised my hand (in 1975 for the Guard and in 1983 for the
> Reserve) to take the Oath to Protect and Defend the Constitution of
> the United States, I did not give up any of my Gods' given rights as a
> freeborn man. However, I accepted a very large brake upon my liberty
> to exercise those rights.
>
> I was not free to speak every thought I had, and could be disciplined
> for wrong expressions, in uniform.
>
> I was not free to bear weapons everywhere I pleased, nor even have
> them in my possession sometimes.
>
> I was free to attend chapel, or perform "fatigue" duties.
>
> I did not get up when I wanted, wear what I wanted nor ate what I wanted.
>
> I accepted that others were in authority over me, up to and including
> sending me to my death, lawfully.
>
> Those who have not borne that burden, know squat.
>
> mea sententia - Venator
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
> Salve Annia
>  
> I would agree with you, as long as they perform them that is fine, or of course have them performed if their beliefs are an issue. My point is we shouldn't move to preventing them having that choice. Maybe they can reconcile it all. Frankly that is for them, as you seem to say too, all that matters is the ritual is completed, but don't take that right to choose away from them.
>
> As to repeating ourselves, well of course. This is Nova Roma and until a number of issues are resolved one way or another they are bound to crop up every so often (or more).
>  
> Vale bene
> Caesar

The issue has been resolved, check out the NR FAQ on the wiki.


-Anna Bucci

...from a Canadian folk singer. Machinatrix sent this to me. - Venator

Story: http://www.terry-kelly.com/pittance/pittance_en.htm

Video: http://www.terry-kelly.com/pittance/pittance_en_video.htm

or same video little better quality on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kX_3y3u5Uo

I stand by all my comrades, whomever and however they love; they Stood and Did.

On 8/30/2010 6:01 PM, lathyrus77 wrote:

>
> good post, Venator. You sum it up quite nicely.
>
> -Anna Bucci
> (US Army, 1999-2002)
>

I agree, well said. I thank both of you for your service - I've never
served myself, but I have many friends who have, and some of them are
gay, so that issue is important to me.

Venator said better what I was trying to get at with my weak qualifier
"basically". I certainly didn't mean to suggest that servicemen/women
have no rights at all, only that the military operates on a different
set of rules than companies, organizations, or even other branches of
the federal government, which are all subject to anti-discrimination laws.

Vale,
Seneca


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Cato, 'John Lennon is not a god'...as a life long fan of the man I wpold have to disagree ! ;)

--- On Mon, 30/8/10, Cato <catoinnyc@...> wrote:


From: Cato <catoinnyc@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, 30 August, 2010, 7:59


 



Cato Maiori sal.

You should only use quotation marks if you're going to quote the actual lyrics, not make up insipid fantasies.

John Lennon is not a god, by the way.

Vale,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rory12001" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Anna;
> all I can think of now is John Lennon's 'Imagine'
>
> "Imagine no incessant hating
> I wonder if you can
>
> Imagine all the people
> being civil on the ML for today...
>
> You may say I'm a dreamer
> But I'm not the only one
> I hope someday you'll join us
> And as Romans we'll live as one"
>
> Divus Johannes Lennonus!
> M. Hortensia Maior
>
> :
> >
> > The creature.
> >
> >
> >
> > Like I said before, haters gotta hate.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Anna Bucci
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Cato" <catoinnyc@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Cato Iunio Neroni sal.
> > >
> > > Here - amazingly - in one respect Maior is correct. Anyone can take private auspices for themselves.
> > >
> > > To take the auspices for the *State*, however, is the domain of the curule magistrates and, if there is a gap in those magistracies, the right reverts to the patricians in the Senate. That is the ancient Roman way.
> > >
> > > It is not nearly as complex as some would have us think, however; in Livy we have a quite clear description of how auspices were taken.
> > >
> > > Much of the complexity we have been stuck with is borne of erroneous and inaccurate understandings of what the processes were and the sources we have for them *and* the scholarship surrounding them - and a grossly inflated sense of power and authority assumed by the creature in the chair of the pontifex maximus. Gualterus Graecus explained much of this in several posts in July, which are well worth re-reading.
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Cato
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rory12001" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Salve Nero;
> > > > here is link to a stub on augurs
> > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Augur
> > > >
> > > > In ancient Rome to become an augur was the greatest height a Roman could aspire to; Cicero was an augur. They were state religious specialists on divination. It's an extremely complex subject that demands a lot of study. And here is a reading list
> > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Reading_list_for_the_cultus_deorum#Religion_and_Law
> > > >
> > > > Everyday Romans observed signs & took auspices about their own affairs. These are personal or private auspices. I can, you can, everyone can take personal auspices.
> > > > So working on the concept of empowering cultores, we want people to learn how to do this. I don't want to become a state augur, but if you aspire to this post; start studying now;-)
> > > > optime vale
> > > > Maior
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Salve,
> > > > > I am not trying to start fighting (everything said anymore leads to conflict),
> > > > > but do you want to learn auspices so that any one of us can be ready to take an
> > > > > augurs chair? Or is this for personal use? Just curious:)
> > > > > DTIC
> > > > > Nero.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: rory12001 <rory12001@>
> > > > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > Sent: Sun, August 29, 2010 9:44:56 PM
> > > > > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > M. Hortensia P Corvae spd;
> > > > > you asked the most imporant questions Nova Roma can ask of itself;
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. What is Nova Roma?
> > > > > a non-profit
> > > > > a vision to restore Roman culture and religio
> > > > > a re-enactor group
> > > > > a study group
> > > > > something else
> > > > >
> > > > > For myself it is the vision. At the upcoming conventus, we will learn how to
> > > > > take personal auspices. This is something I want to do for myself and for other
> > > > > cultores.
> > > > >
> > > > > it's great to ask these questions. I think a great deal of dysfunction in Nova
> > > > > Roma is due to conflicting ideas of what Nova Roma is.. Having open civil
> > > > > discussions helps clarify our problems and find ways to resolve them.
> > > > > optime vale
> > > > > Maior
> > > > >
> > > > > 2
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I guess my real issue is that nowhere else in our daily lives do we seek or
> > > > > >expect auspices to be taken before necessary organizational business can be
> > > > > >conducted. >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > "Does our organization need this? Does this or that thing enable our
> > > > > organization to function more smoothly and efficiently?"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That is really what I would like to see the Senate examine closely.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Salve, et gratias,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Paulla
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rory12001" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Salve Corva;
> > > > > > > let me explain Rome was founded by augury, it is the most venerated aspect
> > > > > >of the religio romana. NR always has had augurs to take the auspices.
> > > > > > > Until Albucius the augurs never had a problem with officials, the officials
> > > > > >wrote to the augurs (they do have lives) requesting them to take auspices & gave
> > > > > >them a series of dates..
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No problem. I know our augurs; the PM Piscinus, the censor K.Fabius Modianus,
> > > > > >and M. Lucretius Agricola who journeyed from Japan to Sarmatia to take the
> > > > > >auspices for the weddings. They are devoted and take it seriously.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If they're repealing "Don't ask; don't tell," what policy are they replacing it with, if anything?

My opinion: The Greeks had gays in the military, and they had no problem with it. Why do we?

Paulla

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
>
> Salve amice.
>
> Yes it is being repealed, but the amendment won't likely be in force until 2011 given the remaining stages it has to go through.
>
> Vale bene
> Caesar

Hear Hear Crispus !

--- On Mon, 30/8/10, GAIUS MARCIUS CRISPUS <jbshr1pwa@...> wrote:


From: GAIUS MARCIUS CRISPUS <jbshr1pwa@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, 30 August, 2010, 16:49


 





--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@...> wrote:

.......fuel the misconception that our dispute in the Senate is between Christians and Cultores Deorum when it is anything but.

Salvete omnes

Please, citizens, let us not entrench ourselves behind religious banners again.

Can we not just recognise that there are people of all beliefs and traditions, and none, here, but that at the end of the day we all have one vital thing in common, which is why we are all here.

We are all roman citizens, and the most important thing for all of us is to work together to heal the problems that are stopping our republic from expanding, from moving forwards, from continuing to exist.

Lets recognise that, yes there are some differences between us, but those should not be obstacles to working together.

All religious wars end badly, if not now then in the future.

Lets put our differences aside, and work together, not use up all our energy in internecine disputes.

Valete optime omnes
Crispus
"Then none was for a party; then all were for the state".











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve,

Indeed.

Vale,
C. Pompeius Marcellus


On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:20:51 -0500
Publius Ullerius Stephanus Venator <famila.ulleria.venii@...> wrote:

> ...from a Canadian folk singer. Machinatrix sent this to me. - Venator
>
> Story: http://www.terry-kelly.com/pittance/pittance_en.htm
>
> Video: http://www.terry-kelly.com/pittance/pittance_en_video.htm
>
> or same video little better quality on youtube:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kX_3y3u5Uo
>
> I stand by all my comrades, whomever and however they love; they Stood and
>Did.

Recte dixit!
vale
Maior
, DecimusGladiusLupus wrote:

>
> Hear Hear Crispus !
>
> -
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@> wrote:
>
> .......fuel the misconception that our dispute in the Senate is between Christians and Cultores Deorum when it is anything but.
>
> Salvete omnes
>
> Please, citizens, let us not entrench ourselves behind religious banners again.
>
> Can we not just recognise that there are people of all beliefs and traditions, and none, here, but that at the end of the day we all have one vital thing in common, which is why we are all here.
>
> We are all roman citizens, and the most important thing for all of us is to work together to heal the problems that are stopping our republic from expanding, from moving forwards, from continuing to exist.
>
> Lets recognise that, yes there are some differences between us, but those should not be obstacles to working together.
>
> All religious wars end badly, if not now then in the future.
>
> Lets put our differences aside, and work together, not use up all our energy in internecine disputes.
>
> Valete optime omnes
> Crispus
> "Then none was for a party; then all were for the state".
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Salve Venii,

And you learned the greater value of self discipline and developed a greater appreciation for the freedoms you now hold.

Vale,

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Publius Ullerius Stephanus Venator <famila.ulleria.venii@...> wrote:
>
> Salvete omnes;
>
> "When we assumed the soldier ['s duties] we did not lay aside the
> citizen," from then Gen. George Washington's June 26, 1775, letter to
> the Provincial Congress...
>
> I am a veteran, as is my wife, as are many of our closest friends.
> Machinatirix and I have both seen combat.
>
> When I raised my hand (in 1975 for the Guard and in 1983 for the
> Reserve) to take the Oath to Protect and Defend the Constitution of
> the United States, I did not give up any of my Gods' given rights as a
> freeborn man. However, I accepted a very large brake upon my liberty
> to exercise those rights.
>
> I was not free to speak every thought I had, and could be disciplined
> for wrong expressions, in uniform.
>
> I was not free to bear weapons everywhere I pleased, nor even have
> them in my possession sometimes.
>
> I was free to attend chapel, or perform "fatigue" duties.
>
> I did not get up when I wanted, wear what I wanted nor ate what I wanted.
>
> I accepted that others were in authority over me, up to and including
> sending me to my death, lawfully.
>
> Those who have not borne that burden, know squat.
>
> mea sententia - Venator
>

Salve,

I didn't ask for you to "instruct" me, but rather to make public the procedures; my interest in them is primarily to review and evaluate them from a scholarly perspective since based on the fragments that have been revealed in previous debates it seems that your procedures are highly syncretic and do little justice to the ancient evidence.

Besides this, if such documents had been made public then I doubt there would have been an impasse over how to conduct a tripudium earlier in the year. But, in fact, it seems no such documents yet exist (re: "So documents will be produced")? This entire game of secrecy is detrimental to the religious life of NR, both from a scholarly reconstructionist perspective and an instructional perspective.

As for my own religious practices, no, I do not worship the Roman gods, but that is completely irrelevant to the question of whether your augural and other religious procedures should be made public. But, you really want to turn this into a quiz session?

First of all, as has happened a number of other times, you've mistranslated the Latin. You translate Festus 157a as "The Di Manes are invoked in auguries since it is believed that all things on earth and in the sky proceed from them", but the Latin is "Manes di ab auguribus invocantur, quod i per omnia aetheria terrenaque ma<nare credantur>". (The manuscript has a lacuna, as you can see, and the end of the sentence is reconstructed with the aid of Paulus Diaconus' epitome). The Latin says "The di manes are invoked by augurs because they are believed to emanate through all things ethereal and terrestrial." You got the subject and object reversed in the subordinate clause and in the main clause "ab auguribus" doesn't mean "in auguries" but "by augurs".

OK, so, according to Festus the di manes are invoked by augurs. Now, you want an "in detail" description of this? As far as I know there exists no ancient description of a detailed invocation of and ritual to the di manes. Presumably the ritual would be akin to what we know about invoking the di inferi in general, which differs from the di superi in terms of direction (earthward instead of heavenward), possibly time of day, and the type of animal (e.g. a black sheep) for sacrifice, which for the di inferi was a holocaust.

No doubt you've come up with a detailed ritual, so now your turn. Give us all the detailed ritual with full citations to primary and secondary sources and annotations describing how you filled in the gaps in the evidence.

Vale,

Gualterus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Gualtere
>
> Detailed instructions for three days of rituals? You want me to write up an instructional booklet, in my spare time I suppose, to cover in detail everything that an augur and then that a curule magistrate would have to do. This is why, in the past, I have only instructed cultores Deorum, and then only those who had already been instructed on Roman ritual, on how to take auspices. If you don't know how to perform purifications, then you cannot properly perform Roman rituals. And if you do not know the details of performing a Roman ritual, then you are unable to take auspices in a proper Roman manner.
>
> You are not a cultor Deorum, Gualtere. You do not so much as keep a lararium as a gentilis. So I cannot expect you to perform the preliminary rituals. Why then would I waste my time instructing you or any other non-practitioner when all you want to know is a perfunctory method of going through the motions?
>
> Did you read my post of today? Seneca said, "The first way to worship the Gods is to believe in the Gods." If you don't believe in the Gods, if you don't offer Them worship, then why would you expect Them to provide you with any answers in an auspicium? Why should I, or any Citizen, whether a cultor or not, therefore trust in the auspices taken by a non-practitioner?
>
> Instruction will necessarily be given in writing. So documents will be produced. But they will not be made public, they will not be for just anyone to use. Some will pertain to augurs alone, some for magistrates, as the methods used by both differ in many respects. Why should it be this way? with our instructions remaining within the Collegium Augurum? Let's start with you, Gualtere.
>
> Festus wrote, "The Di Manes are invoked in auguries since it is believed that all things on earth and in the sky proceed from them (157a)."
>
> In detail, describe for me how one invokes the Manes and makes offerings to them, and how does this differ from how one should invoke the celestial Gods?
>
> Vale et vade in pace Deorum
>
> M. Moravius
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gualterus_graecus" <waltms1@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > Is there some internal document that explains the procedure you use in detail? I'd be curious to read it, and it should be public anyway for the benefit of curule magistrates who would like to take their own auspices in the future.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Gualterus
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@> wrote:
> > >
> > > M. Moravius C. Petronio s. p. d.
> > >
> > ....
> > > It takes a minimum of three days to take auspices. It involves performing certain rites of purification, and of preparing a templum, of performing sacrifices to Manes at night and to the celestial Gods at dawn, before auspices may be properly taken. And that assumes that conditions are proper throughout the ceremonies. With enough advanced notice I or one of the other augures may be able to schedule the time needed.
> > ...
> >
>

Salvete y'all,

Lennon was an atheist, perhaps though, he night enjoy the irony but would probably not accept the "God" appointment:)

Valete,

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, DecimusGladiusLupus <hicksvillebozo@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Cato, 'John Lennon is not a god'...as a life long fan of the man I wpold have to disagree ! ;)
>
> --- On Mon, 30/8/10, Cato <catoinnyc@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Cato <catoinnyc@...>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, 30 August, 2010, 7:59
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> Cato Maiori sal.
>
> You should only use quotation marks if you're going to quote the actual lyrics, not make up insipid fantasies.
>
> John Lennon is not a god, by the way.
>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>

Iulia Mariae Petronio S.P.D.

Wow to both of you!

Now can I post them in The last Enchantment?

Si placet, si place bella?

Valete optime,

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "petronius_dexter" <jfarnoud94@...> wrote:
>
> C. Petronius C. Caecae s.p.d.,
>
> I took a little moment to translate your poetic prose in French.
>
> NOVA ROMA
>
> Oh, ma Nova Roma! Demeure de mon coeur!
> République de mon âme, rêve en construction.
> Tu gis sur le trottoir, gravement blessée.
> Et personne ne s'arrêtera pour t'aider. Pourquoi?
>
> Personne ne s'agenouillera avec toi dans la fange?
> Personne ne prendra soin de tes coups? Ne soignera tes plaies?
> Personne ne te tendra une coupe apaisante d'eau fraîche?
> Ils passent, certains te méprisent, te maudissent, souhaitent ta mort
> Et déjà tu combats pour respirer avec peine.
> D'autres mettent du sel sur tes plaies et parlent de
> Purification et d'autres éloignent leurs
> Toges immaculées, refusant toute souillure.
>
> Je n'ai pas beaucoup à donner mais ce qui est à moi est à toi:
> Je te porte dans mes bras, tremblante de faiblesse,
> Recevant ton sang sur les mains et les vêtements
> Comme honorable et de la confiance et la raison d'un chagrin cruel.
> Réchauffe-toi contre moi, comme une enfant:
> Berce-toi, en chantant doucement, ma mère, mon bébé,
> Murmure les mots qui te réconfortent
> Que tous deux savons de peu de sens:
>
> Mais j'irai trouver ces choses qui peuvent te guérir
> Oui, je te recouvre, mère bien aimée, de ma stola,
> Et marche tête nue dans la ville,
> Rechercher ce dont j'ai besoin, me contentant de t'offrir
> Ma propre dignité, quand tu as reçu le peu
> Que je puis apporter. Derrière moi, la poussière rejetée s'accroche
> A ma tunique. Moqueries et railleries me suivent, venues
> Des deux côtés de la rue: je continue regardant devant,
> Le dos droit, la tête levée, cachant mes larmes.
>
> C. Maria Caeca
>
> Optime vale.
>
> C. Petronius Dexter
> Arcoiali scribebat
> a. d. IV Kalendas Septembres P. Memmio K. Fabio II coss.
>

Ave Messallina!

So good to see you posting! Since you have been so inundated i am glad I have not had the chance to reply to your last email*teases* I have been just a *little* busy and I am just now getting to catch up on a weeks (maybe two?) worth of ML.
Uhm, I do hope you come back before the Ludi next week, I hear your horse are getting very antsy and need to run...
I wish you and you Mother the best and keep a flame burning in my heart for you both.

Ab imo pectore,

Cura ut valeas,

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Maxima Valeria Messallina <maximavaleriamessallina@...> wrote:
>
> Salvete
>  
> Just want to say a very big thank you to all of you who have sent me private emails since my resignation. My inbox has been inundated and as I have very limited time to be online (I will only be online on Sundays), it will take me some time to answer everyone, but I will answer you!
> Thank you for your prayers and words of support for my mother and me. It is very much appreciated! Thank you again!
>  
> Valete bene in pace Deorum,
>  
> Maxima Valeria Messallina
> Sacerdos Vestalis
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Salve,

Firstly, the reason for my post was obvious. Annia stated that the claim that Maior wanted Christians to be kicked out was either a mistake or a lie. The fact is, however, that Maior did demand this in an outburst last month. The entire middle part of your post is irrelevant since the point was that Maior wanted to kick the "atheists" out.

Secondly, while Christianity may not be a completely polarizing issue in NR, the fact is that Maior has made clearly anti-Christian/anti-monotheist comments on various occasions, with the most extreme one being last month's demand to kick them all out. Moreover, I didn't make any mention of the Senate or the role of Christianity in the larger context of NR, or the views of any other persons, so I don't see how my post "only helps fuel the misconception that our dispute in the Senate is between Christians and Cultores Deorum".

Finally, Cato already explained what he meant by "creature" and while I initially considered "anti-pope" a rather light jab, not unlike your "BABies" reference, it has been repeated too many times and he's now been warned about it.

Vale,

Gualterus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "marcushoratius" <MHoratius@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Gualtere
>
> And it was necessary for you to explain this why?
>
> Can you explain why you allow Cato to call me "creature"? Or why you have allowed Sulla to refer to me as "anti-pope"? Name-calling and insults are apparently permitted by you here, but only by select people.
>
> The term "atheist" was applied to Christians and other monotheists by ancient Romans, since they deny the existence of the Gods. Why didn't you explain that part of Maior's statement since she used the term in that sense of meaning? Atheist was applied to Epicurians as well, since, although they paid lipservice to the existence of Gods, they thought of Them as composed of atoms, decomposing through natural processes, and not really doing anything and not caring about human concerns. So although the Epicurians admitted to the existence of Gods, it was that last part that left Epicurians "without gods," or atheists, because they did not believe there could be any interaction with the Gods.
>
> Cultores Deorum accept not only the existence of the Gods, but that They walk beside us, live among us, are part of our Civitas. Res Publica refers to public matters, with the Gods included among that public. That is why Romans built edifices for the Gods to reside in while They visited the City. Temples were not churches, the attendants attended the Gods, and others were rarely if ever permitted to enter the sacra aedes.
>
> The division in Nova Roma today, or so it seems to me, is between those who wish to maintain the Constitution and keep the Gods as part of our Civitas, and those who would dispense with the Gods. It is not a matter of practicing any other traditions alongside the Religio Romana. But it is an apt description to term as "atheists" those who would exclude the Gods from our affairs.
>
> The lines are not drawn between Christians and cultores as sometimes posed, as Christians and cultores are on both sides of the Senate debates. The current Albucius faction includes Cato, Ti. Galerius, Suetonius, and Sulla who may be Christian-monotheists on one side, but they are joined by Palladius, Agrippa, and Gnaeus Caesar who are cultores Deorum. Marinus, Audens and Scholastica are Christian moderates who side with Quintilianus, as do Fr. Apulus and Perusianus (who I think are Christians), while cultores, gentiles, and practioners of all stripes join with Quintilianus too.
>
> So your post only helps fuel the misconception that our dispute in the Senate is between Christians and Cultores Deorum when it is anything but.
>
> Vale
> M. Moravius
>
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gualterus_graecus" <waltms1@> wrote:
> >
> > Salvete,
> >
> > The most recent comment by Maior, back in July, was to throw the "atheists" out, but under this moniker she included Christians and all monotheists, so Poplicola's comment isn't completely off:
> >
> > "Nova Roma will turn into an atheist-monotheism under them!!!" (msg #77536)
> >
> > "Sulla, Cato, Albucius and their friends won't stop until the gods
> > are mocked and their temples empty. Already they are trying to throw out our beloved Pontifex Maximus!
> >
> > Cultores it is US. vs them
> > Nova Roma for the gods and Rome!
> > Atheists OUT!!!!!" (msg #77516)
> >
> > -Gualterus
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "lathyrus77" <lathyrus77@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "qvalerius" <q.valerius.poplicola@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You're mistaken. I've personally seen posts by Hortensia here attacking Cato *for Christianity*. She even asked one time for all Christians to be kicked out of Nova Roma.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > You're mistaken or lying. No one cares that he's christian. There are a large amount of christians here, and it makes no difference whatsoever. It's his conduct. If anyone cared about his christianity then all the other christians would be attacked as well, and they're not.
> > >
> > >
> > > She's never asked for all christians to be kicked out.
> > >
> > >
> > > -Anna Bucci
> > >
> >
>

Maria Juliae Sal,

You can post mine ...but there's a price. See, my software messes with the pronunciation of other languages, (and I don't have the discretionary $500 to get the modules I would need for it to read French correctly), soooo ...if you will read that astoundingly wonderful gift of Dexter's to me at Conventus, you can post my piece there. Deal? :)

Vale quam optime,
Maria

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ave Aeternia,

*laughs* I doubt we poor artists and minstrels will be heard over the blare of politics!

But give it a go, o' thee in whose ears the muses whisper profusely!

Vale,

Julia

P.S. Oh and there will be Barbarians, the Germans are the gates! Well two of them were on Skype with me for several hours last night planning their strategy for the conventus *laughs* Alright Rota is only half German...
Oh and we will be roasting a wild boar on Sunday for the evening meal.
And Scholastica will be doing an ancient clothing class and Sonja Rota will take measurements and make garments (for a price of course)

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Belle Morte Statia <syrenslullaby@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Julia,
>
>
> Touche! So who gets to start first? ;-)
>
>
> Vale,
> Aeternia
>

Ave Venii,

> This is so appropriate, I seem much more productive in poetry and
> prose writing during the periods when I do not take medication for the
> clinical depression with which I have been dealing for many years...
>
> A little bit of poetic back and forth would be wonderful!

Then let's continue it - i enjoyed it Sir! I will do my best to participate!

>
> One can say so much in fewer words than straight prose.
>
> Also, trying to answer in poetry gives one pause and cause to think.
>
> Something else the Res Publica could use.
>

Yes.

Vale bene,

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Publius Ullerius Stephanus Venator <famila.ulleria.venii@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Lucia Iulia;
>
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Lucia Iulia Aquila wrote:
> >
> > [excision]
> >
> > "Poets are mad: so, Courtiers, you declare;
> > And right you are; but I daresay that you
> > Have not a little of that madness too,
> > That softness of the head that all men share.
> >
> > If you and us, however, we compare,
> > Different the forms of madness we pursue:
> > Ours is in rhyme, and yours, in prose; though true,
> > No other difference 'twixt the two is there."
> >
> > Madness can be s sign of the divine within:)
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Julia
> >
>
> This is so appropriate, I seem much more productive in poetry and
> prose writing during the periods when I do not take medication for the
> clinical depression with which I have been dealing for many years...
>
> A little bit of poetic back and forth would be wonderful!
>
> One can say so much in fewer words than straight prose.
>
> Also, trying to answer in poetry gives one pause and cause to think.
>
> Something else the Res Publica could use.
>
> bene vale - Venator
>

Ave Maria,

Deal!!!!!
*laughs - a lot* But you might prefer that Petronius reads it.
But hey, i am game.

Vale

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "C.Maria Caeca" <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
>
> Maria Juliae Sal,
>
> You can post mine ...but there's a price. See, my software messes with the pronunciation of other languages, (and I don't have the discretionary $500 to get the modules I would need for it to read French correctly), soooo ...if you will read that astoundingly wonderful gift of Dexter's to me at Conventus, you can post my piece there. Deal? :)
>
> Vale quam optime,
> Maria
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Salve Julia,

Uh ...well ...yes!!!!! On the other hand ...I could tell from what I was able to read, and from what I remember of French pronunciation, that I is beautiful ...and beautiful things can bring me to tears ...and that would be, you know, undignified, but, I'll be delighted with whatever I can get *smiles*.

Vale bene,
Maria, just Maria!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ave Maria,

Well, after i am through reading it you may be in tears from laughter!
oh we are going to have fun at the conventus I can just see us now...

Vale,

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "C.Maria Caeca" <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Julia,
>
> Uh ...well ...yes!!!!! On the other hand ...I could tell from what I was able to read, and from what I remember of French pronunciation, that I is beautiful ...and beautiful things can bring me to tears ...and that would be, you know, undignified, but, I'll be delighted with whatever I can get *smiles*.
>
> Vale bene,
> Maria, just Maria!
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Salve, Julia!

Yes, we are!!!!! And ...did I mention ...I can come back with you on Tuesday, if that's OK! :) Which means ...I can stay and play on Monday, yeah!

C.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ave Maria!

Excellent! Oh and snacks, I can eat Teriyaki Jerky. *laughs* As a snack. Low carb, low fat, hi protien but killer salt.I just tried jerky for the first time a few months ago. Interesting. I like it.

I am leaving the Nash about 4 or 5 in the morning on Thursday and i should get into Atlanta about 8 or 9 and that should put us in S.C about noonish or 1pm. This way I can set up *our* booth and then get a good night's sleep for the opening.

Well it is coming together... I'll hollar at you more about it later. I have been southern bell-in' all evening, better quit it:) I guess I am just gettin' geared up for our trip deep in the holler in the back woods of South Ca'lina.

*grin*

Vale optime,

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "C.Maria Caeca" <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
>
> Salve, Julia!
>
> Yes, we are!!!!! And ...did I mention ...I can come back with you on Tuesday, if that's OK! :) Which means ...I can stay and play on Monday, yeah!
>
> C.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Salvete quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque salutem plurimam dicit

A little philosophy for tonight!

********************************************************************

Thales and the slave girl:

Socrates-
And all these things the philosopher does not even know that he does not know; for he does not keep aloof from them for the sake of gaining reputation, but really it is only his body that has its place and... home in the city; his mind, considering all these things petty and of no account, disdains them and is borne in all directions, as Pindar says, "both below the earth," and measuring the surface of the earth, and "above the sky," studying the stars, and investigating the universal nature of every thing that is, each in its entirety, never lowering itself to anything close at hand.

Theodorus-
What do you mean by this, Socrates?

Socrates-
Why, take the case of Thales, Theodorus. While he was studying the stars and looking upwards, he fell into a pit, and a neat, witty Thracian servant girl jeered at him, they say, because he was so eager to know the things in the sky that he could not see what was there before him at his very feet. The same jest applies to all who pass their lives in philosophy.

For really such a man pays no attention to his next door neighbor; he is not only ignorant of what he is doing, but he hardly knows whether he is a human being or some other kind of a creature; but what a human being is and what is proper for such a nature to do or bear different from any other, this he inquires and exerts himself to find out. Do you understand, Theodorus, or not?

Theodorus-
Yes, I do; you are right.

~Plato, Theaetetus (173e-174b)See More

********************************************************************

And now for a short excerpt from Beyond the Fringe sketch performed by Alan Bennett and Jonathan Miller in the 1960s that parodies the style of ordinary language philosophy:

Bennett: Other people have jobs to do, don't they? Um, what do people do these days... um, well, they...

Miller: Grow lawns, I believe.

Bennett: They do. They drive buses, or they sell ice cream. Or they play games.

Miller: Ah. More important.

Bennett: That's more important. Yes. We also games, you see. But we, as philosophers, we play language games. We play games with language. Language games...When you and I go onto the cricket pitch, we do so secure in the knowledge that a game of cricket is...well...it's in the offing, isn't it? It's not in progress, it's in the offing. But when we play language games, we do so rather to find out what game it is we're playing!

Miller: Ah, yes.

********************************************************************

Valete optime,

Julia

Hmmm ...how about nuts and trail mix? Also ...but never mind that ...I'll pack us a grand treat road trip basket, not to worry!

Later, C

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

C. Petronius M. Hortensiae s.p.d.,

> I'm in total agreement, let's divinize him. It's so Roman! I wonder if someone has translated 'Imagine' into latin, that would be so great.

Yes of course, I did. Here:
http://www.trigofacile.com/jardins/cucullus/poesie/imagine.htm

In usenet groups my nickname is Caligula from 1998.

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter
Arcoiali scribebat
Pridie Kalendas Septembres P. Memmio K. Fabio II coss.

Ave,

That sounds good as well. Fruit. Oh and I get 20% off at Denny's *laughs* I am counting on you being the snack lady!
Hey, I can a couple of nice porterhouses and we can cook them on the engine of the car. Maybe we better skip that, I burn water - we don't want to bow up the car - Rota would never forgive me:)

Vale,

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "C.Maria Caeca" <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
>
> Hmmm ...how about nuts and trail mix? Also ...but never mind that ...I'll pack us a grand treat road trip basket, not to worry!
>
> Later, C
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Iulia Petronio Maiori sal,

>Yes of course, I did.

Petroni, I knew this but I did not want to "steal your thunder":)

Caeca and I are going to sing that on our way to South Carolina... of course she doesn't know it yet...

Vale bene,

Julia

P.S. Caligula?

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "petronius_dexter" <jfarnoud94@...> wrote:
>
> C. Petronius M. Hortensiae s.p.d.,
>
> > I'm in total agreement, let's divinize him. It's so Roman! I wonder if someone has translated 'Imagine' into latin, that would be so great.
>
> Yes of course, I did. Here:
> http://www.trigofacile.com/jardins/cucullus/poesie/imagine.htm
>
> In usenet groups my nickname is Caligula from 1998.
>
> Vale.
>
> C. Petronius Dexter
> Arcoiali scribebat
> Pridie Kalendas Septembres P. Memmio K. Fabio II coss.
>

Salve,

I was about to say it's not a Road Trip without at least *one* pitstop at
Denny's it's quintissential, just like stopping at one of those Tourist
Stops where you can barely pronounce the name ;)


Vale,
Aeternia

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 8:50 PM, luciaiuliaaquila <
luciaiuliaaquila@...> wrote:

>
>
> Ave,
>
> That sounds good as well. Fruit. Oh and I get 20% off at Denny's *laughs* I
> am counting on you being the snack lady!
> Hey, I can a couple of nice porterhouses and we can cook them on the engine
> of the car. Maybe we better skip that, I burn water - we don't want to bow
> up the car - Rota would never forgive me:)
>
> Vale,
>
>
> Julia
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, "C.Maria
> Caeca" <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm ...how about nuts and trail mix? Also ...but never mind that ...I'll
> pack us a grand treat road trip basket, not to worry!
> >
> > Later, C
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica C. Mariae Caecae L. Juliae Aquilae quiritibus, sociis,
> peregrinisque bonae voluntatis S.P.D.
>
>
> Maria Juliae Sal,
>
> You can post mine ...but there's a price. See, my software messes with the
> pronunciation of other languages, (and I don't have the discretionary $500 to
> get the modules I would need for it to read French correctly), soooo ...if you
> will read that astoundingly wonderful gift of Dexter's to me at Conventus, you
> can post my piece there. Deal? :)
>
> ATS: Well, with luck Dexter might be there to read it to you...and there
> are several of us who can manage French, if not so well as a native speaker.
> ;-)))
>
> Vale quam optime,
> Maria
>
> Valete quam optime!
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ave Aeternia,

Ya got that right. Nashville just has not been the same since Denny's left town. Of course my arteries have cleared now from all those 3am breakfasts and watching the sun come up drinking enough coffee until whomever was driving was awake enough to drive:)
"Awful House" just didn't cut it as a substitute, glad they are also beginning to go the way of the dinosaur.
The nocturnal me misses New York cuz the pickens are gettin' very slim in these hear parts.
Darn, i do have to quit that, maybe I should speak Latin instead.

Vale,

Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Belle Morte Statia <syrenslullaby@...> wrote:
>
> Salve,
>
> I was about to say it's not a Road Trip without at least *one* pitstop at
> Denny's it's quintissential, just like stopping at one of those Tourist
> Stops where you can barely pronounce the name ;)
>
>
> Vale,
> Aeternia
>
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 8:50 PM, luciaiuliaaquila <
> luciaiuliaaquila@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Ave,
> >
> > That sounds good as well. Fruit. Oh and I get 20% off at Denny's *laughs* I
> > am counting on you being the snack lady!
> > Hey, I can a couple of nice porterhouses and we can cook them on the engine
> > of the car. Maybe we better skip that, I burn water - we don't want to bow
> > up the car - Rota would never forgive me:)
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> >
> > Julia
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, "C.Maria
> > Caeca" <c.mariacaeca@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hmmm ...how about nuts and trail mix? Also ...but never mind that ...I'll
> > pack us a grand treat road trip basket, not to worry!
> > >
> > > Later, C
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

She does now! LOL! C.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Oh Maria!

Yes, you do...
I was teasing about having Latin Kareoke, maybe on the trip we should warm up for it!
Imma havin a feelin we're gonna have a lot of fun!

Vale,
Julia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "C.Maria Caeca" <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
>
> She does now! LOL! C.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Because christianity rules the nation
Nero

________________________________
From: aerdensrw <aerdensrw@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, August 30, 2010 6:32:42 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Res Publica


If they're repealing "Don't ask; don't tell," what policy are they replacing it
with, if anything?

My opinion: The Greeks had gays in the military, and they had no problem with
it. Why do we?

Paulla

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...>
wrote:

>
> Salve amice.
>
> Yes it is being repealed, but the amendment won't likely be in force until 2011
>given the remaining stages it has to go through.
>
> Vale bene
> Caesar

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]