"The Kingdom"

It could also be a Queendom: God's Plan for Society

I, God, have my own idea for a healthy international system. Basically, no nations, no borders, no laws, everybody armed, and universal respect.

If this is impracticable, then a world where people choose freely which lands and legal systems they live under would be the next best thing, in my opinion. I think people really should sign social contracts, with the option of opting out at any time for another one.

For example, some might think the death penalty should be widespread and universal, enforced by international law for all crime. I would think crime would go down to zero, or close to it, under such a scenario. I imagine this would be too draconian for most, so only those choosing to live under it would segregate themselves into the geographical community for which it is in effect. Nations or neighborhoods could be defined this way. Heck, a neighborhood could be a nation. In other words, people should be able to decide which sets of laws they want to live under. Another example would be a territory without laws, with the exception of no weapons.

My idea includes weapons because people are different sizes, different skill levels, men and women (long hair is a disadvantage in fighting), and some people are disabled (in wheelchairs or whatever), for starters. Some people might not be talented martial artists, and weapons are "equalizers." (I should note that there are techniques to escape a hair grab).

There can be, on one extreme, zones of no law and absolute freedom, where anarchy rules, and everyone gets to enforce their own personal code of conduct, whether vengeance and retribution, or pardon, while on the other extreme, there could be a zone of a strictly regimented authoritarian state, where every member is a slave to an elected leader. Transfer between any states on the wide spectrum would be permitted, and perhaps the states with the most popular sets of laws would be given the most amount of livable land. People would get interested in law, and I suppose it’s possible a global legal system could emerge, although I would think it far more likely that thousands more than present would dot the landscape. My book, Dracula was a Lawyer, says "Every year, Americans are saddled with more than 150,000 new laws and 2 million regulations." Pretty crazy.

What about war? As for war, I believe everyone should agree to abstain from it. War, if permitted, would only be for those that want to participate, and then only if mutually agreed upon by both sides. I think this applies on a personal level, too. If people want to take the risk of getting killed, I don't see what's stopping them, though. Maybe the most popular legal systems could get the worst land, and the least popular get the best, to even the playing field. Just some thoughts.

Some thoughts on homicide
Homicide, I believe, CAN be reduced to zero, through massive state invasion of privacy, such as in the movie Minority Report. But perhaps such heavy-handedness is counterdestructive, in an overpopulated world that needs winnowing. I think with a global two child per family policy, we can lower to meet the challenges of the future, however.

Then again, maybe the earth can support many more, with people consuming less resources and finding happiness without having more than the Jones'. There is a vast potential for intelligent use of new technologies to create effective equality in health and happiness. I think there needs to be a consensus as to the true potential for supporting our current population, and higher, or if our globe needs less, and if so, by ballpark how many. The only moral way to reach a lower population is by attrition, so we would have to know how long it would take. Of course, as for death, we’re all just animals, and whether the culprit is a virus or another human, the difference can be seen as negligible.. However, I believe we should all fight viruses, and not encourage homicidal (in)humanity.

If the criminal is happy killing, and by thus killing, society is able to rid itself of the killer, then allowing murder performs a double duty. To the ecology of our planet, humanity is the virus. On the other hand, can all disease be eradicated? Is it even thinkable to destroy every pathogen on earth? I think not.

The bible is evil?
As the 10 commandments say thou shalt not kill, murder is seen as an act of evil, something madmen possessed by the devil, or evil men, might do. And yet crime can be seen as a kind of informal justice system (most often?). People who get murdered can be argued to have had it coming, oftentimes. Plus, the bible says no one is good but God. Everyone dies, and the wages of sin is death, the good book says. (Perhaps that doesn't mean every death is always the wages of sin. Logic can sometimes be a bit tricky. Everyone is sinful, in any case, it says). Vengeance is mine, sayeth the lord. Apparently, God kills everyone. And God is love. He’s a man of war. Father time, for most. Time kills all. But what about 'Only the good die young'? Thou shalt not kill, unless you're god, seems to be the message. I AM is his name. And who alive isn't? Perhaps there are no truly evil killings. Are all killings merciful? In Job 3:11-13, he regrets having been born, and being dead, he "would have been asleep," he "would have been at rest." If you want to justify murder, perhaps you need to see the future, and know the balance of enjoyment to misery in the entirety of their future life. If misery outweighs joy, then perhaps the proposed victim would be better off dead. Personally, I value life, even if miserable. Perhaps it shouldn't be 50-50, but rather each individual defining the threshold for themself. One person's hell is another's purgatory. Better sad than dead, in my opinion. Anyway, to live, you must kill. It's kill or be killed. Although the bible says Thou shalt not kill, one can't survive without killing. By this, I mean your white blood cells kill invading pathogens. Everyone kills mosquitoes, for example. A mosquito doesn't want to be swatted any more than I do. Killing should be legalized? Capital punishment is, already. I believe capital punishment to be immoral, however. Criminals are not mosquitoes. And mosquitoes are not criminals. Just wear bug spray. People are not pathogens. A law school instructor once told it's lawyers to "squash them like bugs." I disagree. Treat them like humans. And be nicer to the bugs.

Furthermore,
God is a man of war. A man of war is a soldier. Soldiers kill. Therefore, God loves who he kills. As he kills you, he kills himself, for you are he, and he is One. Orgasm is called the little death. He kills the cancers on his body. Anyone would do as much. If humanity needs less people, then the world (and it's leaders) must needs be turning a blind eye towards war and murder. I don't think this is right. You might think that perhaps what the world needs are some loving murderers. And the murderers themselves might get murdered, as he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword (the law of karma). Probably because once you start on the path of doling out justice, you’re bound to commit an injustice, and karma will bite back. Judge not, lest ye be judged. Nobody's perfect. I am not advocating murder. I want to live. I may be God, but I'm not perfect, either. Maybe karma isn't really a law, more like a tendency or a superstition, perhaps a self-fulfilling prophecy program. There's the bumper sticker, 'no justice, no peace.' There's also forgive and forget and turn the other cheek. The world just needs love. I think justice is best served by a non-homicidal reaction of lengthy or life imprisonment, either to punish or to remove from the general population/society. An incarcerated criminal may receive justice in a lenient or harsh form, even while serving the same amount of time. Justice is a subjective concept/reality. It can be an eye for an eye, or twenty years for an eye, or death for an eye, or being forgiven for an eye. A prisoner may be in a hole/isolation, or in a population, and if there, may be in a position of dominance or subjection. In any case, they can be either happy or miserable, depending on people, drugs/medication, food, or available activity(ies). It's a mess. I think even the most heinous criminals should be happy. Everyone dies, and each individual gets to choose whether it be in an exciting bloody way, going down swinging, or of wrinkly, decrepit, leachy old age and disease. Many think nothing really matters.