Intergalactic Summit

Stop right there. This presumes the existence of God, which I have previously proven is an invalid presumption. The premises of your argument are fundamentally flawed.

So, you openly admit that the laws of other nations don't apply to you, because they're subservient to 'God's Law'?

To extend your analogy to its logical conclusion:

Since you have declared that you are not subject to the laws of humankind, you have no standing before any interstelllar or planetary court and are thus not enttled to the protection of laws passed in said court.

(I'd also like to remind you that planetary governments may not pick and choose which specific laws apply to them and which don't, so there's no point arguing that precedent).

Subjects Stjerna and Ixiris fail to accept that logic is not the way to deal with the divine.

They are munching on dog treats, we are offering feasts!

More than that - the logic that they use has more flaws in it than a spent Gleam crystal.

I never said how big the fleet was back then, fact is: it was obliterated.



Even if they were: Since the supporters must be inferior beings as well, it doesn't matter... IF the Amarrians really were superior.

I've declared no such thing. I've merely said that the laws of God and the laws of nature supercede the laws of man.




That was my point. Even atheist goverments are subject to God's laws - they just don't realise it.

The Scriptures will be your spectacles.

Oh, I understand the concept of God and the Scriptures perfectly well. I've read quite the majority of the Scriptures, actually. My understanding of them is precisely why I don't believe in them.



Actually, I'm a scientist. I argue against the existence of ideas and concepts that are non-falsifiable - that cannot be disproven. Now, from a logical perspective, the existence of your God can easily be disproven - this awkward aspect of logic is why you insist that God exists in a place beyond logic, reason and empirical observation. Well, you see, science is all about empirical observation. Yes, I can't see a quark with my own two eyes, but I can reliably infer its existence through its interactions with other particles, and the well-tested and well-documented theoretical framework of subatomic particle physics.

OK, so yes, fine, it's possible that a God could exist in a place far beyond human understanding, logic, reason and science, but that sort of nebulous speculation is of no practical worth to anyone. The theoretical principles I study can be tested. Those tests can produce results, and those results can be replicated and reproduced to be reviewed and examined by others. The science I study can demonstrably propel ships of vast mass between distances barely comprehensible to the human mind in a fraction of a second.

It was not faith in God or the gods that took the Federation to the stars. It was science, reason and logic. The same is true of your people.



Your prayers are not answered.

I stand corrected. Still, you would be hard-pressed to find a cout of law that would accept that line of reasoning.



Again, you would be hard-pressed to find a court that would accept that. How, for example, does one serve God with a summons? Is God a 'resident' of any legal district or jurisdiction? Most planetary governments have defined the application of the term 'human' as it applies to the legal process. Consequently -- does God, as a non-human by definition, have any standing before a court of law?

It would be quite easy actually, I'd just head to the nearest Theology Council station.