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: minister of religion
Details
Submitted by[?]: Libertarian party of Darnussia
Status[?]: defeated
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: March 2088
Description[?]:
| article 1. to prevent radicals to take high religious positions. article 2. since it is logical these ministers of religion also need a salary and a pension. And no this is not un-communist (before someone starts calling me a fake communist) and i'm too lazy to explain why. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The state's intervention in the appointment of ministers of religion.
Old value:: The state does not intervene in the appointment of ministers of any religion whatsoever.
Current: The state does not intervene in the appointment of ministers of any religion whatsoever.
Proposed: The state nominates ministers of religion, but the appointment is left up to the religious communities themselves.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Remuneration of ministers of religion.
Old value:: Ministers of religion shall receive no remuneration whatsoever.
Current: The state does not intervene in the remuneration of ministers of religion.
Proposed: The salaries and pensions of ministers of religion shall be borne by the state and regulated by the law.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:30:35, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | Wait, Ministers of Religon...we talking about a government official or a private citizen? Because if it's government official I agree with this bill. If this is a private citizen of religon we're talking about, this bill deserves to be spit on. |
| Date | 18:38:09, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | The state and religion should be kept seperate, we cannot interfer in religion and we must give people freedom of religion. (It be private citerzens I assume and not government ministers, I think I am right in saying that, if it was government ministers then it wont be government interference appointing one) |
| Date | 18:47:09, July 29, 2005 CET | From | People's Progressive Party | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | Another stalinist attempt to introduce totalitarianism... |
| Date | 19:13:54, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Democratic Alliance | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | I say we should have a completely secular, laïcité government with a strong separation of church and state. Religion and beliefs are a private matter of personal individuals which the state has no right to interfere in, otherwise we have bias towards certain religious groups and people won't be equal before the law. This will obviously lead to religious surveillance which we cannot permit. Our government should not even ask about religions on census or even acknowledge certain religions over others. Basically, keep religion as far away from the state as possible, otherwise it will be a big mess. It is possibly a "risk" on our national security but the benefits of civil rights and liberties and the just society we receive in the end more than compensates for it. It works for France and other like-minded countries, it can work for us. Thank you. |
| Date | 20:19:10, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian party of Darnussia | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | 1. it will just prevent extremists to get into power. 2. yes state and religion should be seperated but they should still have the right for a pension and salary. 3. this is not about acknowledging religions... |
| Date | 20:28:09, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | If this is a bill just to prevent extremists...then we cannot allow this to pass. |
| Date | 20:37:01, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian party of Darnussia | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | ohw ok! lets all have jihad warriors and KKK warriors fight it out in our great Darnussia! what an utopia for these religious fundamentalists! |
| Date | 20:37:26, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian party of Darnussia | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | (i know jihad is not necceserily violent and KKK is sometimes non-violent...) |
| Date | 21:47:14, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Vuloch Ca Korzia | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | No. Yes. Maybe. |
| Date | 00:13:00, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | You know that the majority of people condemn extremists? The only place where extremism spawns to excessive and uncontrollable levels is in theocracies. |
| Date | 00:13:46, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | Last I checked we are not a theocracy. Thus no real threatening extremism spawns here. And if it did, not like we have torture capabilities to find out how they are operating anyway. |
| Date | 00:56:45, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Social Libertarian party | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | OH BITCHES, SWING VOTE! guess which way the athiest votes? JIGGA YES! |
| Date | 01:26:32, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Social Libertarian party | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | Wait, jigga no. |
| Date | 07:41:56, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | Haha, XD |
| Date | 18:51:02, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Democratic Alliance | To | Debating the minister of religion |
| Message | CoL, you never really think your vote through nowadays. You just say "Yes. No. Maybe" and end up voting the exact same way as the Communist Party. May we have an explanation as to why? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 351 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 399 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In cases where a party has no seat, the default presumption should be that the party is able to contribute to debates in the legislature due to one of its members winning a seat at a by-election. However, players may collectively improvise arrangements of their own to provide a satisfying explanation for how parties with no seats in the legislature can speak and vote there. |
| Random quote: "If we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people to not kill each other? Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want." - Mother Teresa of Calcutta quotes |