We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.

Bill: P.D.L. 003/2368

Details

Submitted by^[?]: S.C.A.F.R.

Status^[?]: passed

Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: August 2370

Description^[?]:

Proposal^[?] to change The state's policy concerning religious clothing.

Old value:: There are no laws regulating the wearing of religious clothing and the wearing of religious symbols.

Current: Public officials are not allowed to wear religious symbols while exercising their duties.

Proposed: Public officials are not allowed to wear religious symbols while exercising their duties.

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date	19:12:17, March 04, 2007 CET
From	Social Democrats
To	Debating the P.D.L. 003/2368
Message	With utmost respect to our political allies and coalition partners, we have to disagree with this resolution. It is our belief that religion is one of the freedoms that every individual has the right to exercise, if not harming others while doing so. As simply wearing different clothes are not dangerous to anyone, we have to state, that such a measure is only an intrusion into civic liberty which is again a fundamental right of every citizen. We appeal the SCA to refrain from such harsh measures. Our political position does not allow us to vote in favour of this bill.

Date	00:42:28, March 05, 2007 CET
From	Aldegarian Libertarian Socialist Party
To	Debating the P.D.L. 003/2368
Message	The ALSP have to agree with SP in this matter although this is not something we will fight hard against, that is, we might support it in return for the SCA's vote at a later time. We will however fight a harsher form of this bill.

Date	14:26:36, March 06, 2007 CET
From	Greenpeace Party
To	Debating the P.D.L. 003/2368
Message	We believe that just law is one. Every official public represents the Republic and its values, not if same and just the political and religious creed.

Date	15:22:39, March 06, 2007 CET
From	Communist Party of Aldegar
To	Debating the P.D.L. 003/2368
Message	Yes - total seperation of state and church is paramount.

Date	09:51:33, March 07, 2007 CET
From	Aldegar Freedom Party
To	Debating the P.D.L. 003/2368
Message	The True Conservative Party will not support this bill, however, would perhaps support a slightly modified version of it - that is, the TCP do not believe that minimalistic cross necklaces or even roserie beads could possibly cause any form of disturbance whatsoever, particularly considering that Christianity and Catholocism are absolutely mainstream religions. However, things such as turbans, burqas, etc, the TCP sees as being slightly more extraverted, and can see the logic in banning this form of religious attire as a means of ensuring the safety of this nation's people - things such as turbans may cause social segregation, the result of which may be race gang attacks\crimes, and it would be far simpler to not wear these items of clothing and, if one practices a religion other than that of mainstream Christianity, to keep ones religion to one's self as a means of preventing social segregation.

Date	15:21:47, March 07, 2007 CET
From	Social Democrats
To	Debating the P.D.L. 003/2368
Message	The SD demands the TCP to apologise to all the members of religions other than cristianity for acting nazist and discriminatory against them!!! What they so blatantly stated is that christian symbols are allowed, but all other are not. Plain and simple. A symbol is a symbol and if one is allowed, all of them are. This statement clearly shows that the TCP is racist in their ideology and we therefore demand that appropriate measures are taken against them!

Date	10:54:45, March 08, 2007 CET
From	Aldegar Freedom Party
To	Debating the P.D.L. 003/2368
Message	The TCP sees the SD's reaction as an emotional, unsubstantiated, unjustifiable outburst and an attack on the TCP. The TCP resents claims and accusations of being a 'racist' party, and by no means is this kind of slander justified. The SD, clearly blinded by their overwhelming, self-righteous political correctness and sensitivity, have made a rash assumption about the TCP's ideologies based on inappropriate and inadequate evidence. The TCP proposes that things such as turbans be banned only from the perspective that this can cause turban wearing muslims to be targetted by racist members of society, and also from the perspective that this may offend other members of society. By no means does the TCP support racism and the party is offended by such rash judgements on the SD's behalf.

Date	11:01:50, March 08, 2007 CET
From	Social Democrats
To	Debating the P.D.L. 003/2368
Message	[Turbans and other non-christian clothing should be banned] from the perspective that this may offend other members of society. We apologise for the harshness, but statements as the one by the TCP above are not tolerated by the SD. Emotional, perhaps. Justified... we believe so. We must not have discriminatory statements in our Council, every individual has the right to excercise whatever he or she pleases, be it religion, love, listening to one kind of music, supporting a particular sport club or speaking any kind of language. This is not something that can be negotiated. The SD will not pursue this matter further because it only distracts the attention of other political stakeholders in this country from pressing issues.

Vote

Seats

yes

Total Seats: 305

Total Seats: 287

abstain

Total Seats: 58

Random fact: Before creating a party organisation, check to see whether there are any existing organisations which cover the same agenda.

Random quote: "If you're not turned on to politics, politics will turn on you." - Ralph Nader

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 69