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: Religious Changes
Details
Submitted by[?]: Wantuni Unitary Capitalist Party
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: October 2409
Description[?]:
| In order to more fully separate church and state in the Empire, the following reforms are proposed by the UCP. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change
Taxation of religious institutions.
Old value:: Recognized religions are not taxed.
Current: Recognized religions are not taxed.
Proposed: Religions are treated as companies, and all profit is taxed, however, charitable donations are not taxed.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The governments stance on religious schools.
Old value:: Only recognised religions may set up religious schools, with no regulations.
Current: Any religion may set up a school, but they are strictly regulated.
Proposed: Religious schools are allowed, but are strictly regulated. Only recognised religions may set up religious schools.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy with respect to prayer in schools.
Old value:: The government leaves this decision up to the schools themselves.
Current: The government leaves this decision up to the schools themselves.
Proposed: Teacher-led prayers in schools are forbidden, except in religious schools.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:57:14, May 23, 2007 CET | From | Social Conservative Party | To | Debating the Religious Changes |
| Message | We do not beleive we should nessesarily seperate the two. But if we, for the sake of argument, are for it. Please do state arguments for all articles. Allow me to begin. Article 1. Why should there be no government stance ? Article 2. Why should schools be forbiden to ahve prayer in them unless religious schools. Should we not allow schools that are secular and non-religious to have students whom perhaps needs to pray, as part of their religion, several times a day ? Should they be confined entirly to religious schooling ? In which way does this helpa nd improve integration ? Article 3. basicly the same as before. In what way should they be regulated, strictly ? what is it that needs regulation ? Article 4. Why should we taxate and make a profit on the beleifs of the people and the faith ? |
| Date | 07:14:19, May 24, 2007 CET | From | Wantuni Unitary Capitalist Party | To | Debating the Religious Changes |
| Message | Well, you got the articles reversed a bit there, but I'll go with it. Article 1 (You list as Article 4). We're not going to be taxing their beliefs, just the profits they make by selling goods, services, etc. If a church is not making a profit, as it shouldn't be, then it won't be taxed. Article 2 (You list as Article 3). They will be required to teach federally mandated standards of mathematics, physical sciences such as Chemistry and Physics, Writing courses, etc. The only difference will be allowance of religious instruction, prayer during school time, education by the ordained, etc. Article 3 (You list as Article 2). This measure ensures that students will not be forced to pray, enter into religious activities, etc. if they do not want to. Our government does not need to sponsor any religious activity. The separation of the church and state must be held sacrosanct. This article does not, however, say that prayer is not allowed during free periods, lunch, after school hours etc. Just that the students will not be coerced to take such actions during school hours and led by teachers. Article 4 (You list as Article 1). Once again, this article does not threaten the religious beliefs of any individual. It simply mandates that the government will not endorse, promote or otherwise assist any religion at all. If and when a government does this, they inherently discriminate against a portion of their population. We're not a theocracy. |
| Date | 07:50:15, May 24, 2007 CET | From | Social Conservative Party | To | Debating the Religious Changes |
| Message | (Had those article names when i logged in last time.. Weird). With the argument on taxation here we are inclined to agree. But a question, when you say making a profit, you mean that they actually have a surplus. You do not mean , for excample. A Wedding ceremony in church costs 2000 WAN to do, the couple pays the money, the ceremony is done, that they have to taxate for doing that ceremony ? I just do not see the need to outlaw religion in schools as that creates a school where those of faith, whom are bound by faith to pray and suchh are unable to attend public schools. If they need to pray, and a teacher is able to supply that preaching, what is wrong with that ? I do not think we should supress those whom have a faith. State church has nothing with theocrazy to do. A State church allows the stately church to be subject to governmental decisions. Else the churches are in the freedom of faith laws, and can do as they please. A Stately church are commanded by the state, and in such areas we can influence them on the bad areas of the faith. (OOC: I cant say im entirly happy with all decisions, but i see this in RL where the state church may hate gays, or whatever, but the state says discrimination is bad and then the church must accept them and such. That is the basic reasoning here.). By having a state church we prevent the church from turning into fundamentalist league. |
| Date | 08:50:54, May 24, 2007 CET | From | Wantuni Unitary Capitalist Party | To | Debating the Religious Changes |
| Message | On the first point: I mean a large surplus for selling goods, large services, etc. We are not suggesting that there be a "wedding tax" (ooc: Though that would solve many a budget issue). On the second point: We are not suggesting to deny the ability for these juveniles the ability of prayer in public places, we are simply advocating that if an institution wishes to use public instruction time, such as time during a Geometry class, for prayer, a special religious school must be founded for that purpose. Public education is meant to be used to achieve state mandated standards, not pray or conduct religious activities. On the third point: While we we understand your logic, we cannot agree with it. When a government sponsors any religion, making it the official religion of the state, it inherently discriminates against a certain portion of the people; the people who do not belong to that religion. The Empire, for as long as the UCP shall exist, shall not allow the government to impose religious doctrine upon its peoples. This violates too many basic rights for it to be allowed. (ooc: Perhaps we can compromise here. I'd be willing to take down that last provision if we can pass the rest of the bill) |
| Date | 09:25:47, May 24, 2007 CET | From | Social Conservative Party | To | Debating the Religious Changes |
| Message | (OOC: yes, if you remove the last article you have my support). With the explanations and the assurances we can see in your arguments we are inclined to agree with the first three articles. Our concern was that we would have taxated the church for doing their work for the faith, but when it comes to selling goods, and actually having a surplus/profit then it could be accepted to taxate them. But we will not sell out the state church. And the argument of discrimination is incorrect, by that logic every decision is discriminating against someone. Every decision has those that are favoured by it, and those whom are not, that is the fact of the day. The government does not impose religious doctrine on the people, but we do however maintain influence over the faith of which a vast majority of the people belong. (OOC: you can basicly see this as two ways. Either as the Saudi-arbaian modell,w ith a Religious Councill, that can speak and have the respect of the religious community, and the government. They are very interlinked and thanks to this the government can do a lot more because they have influence and power in the Religious COuncill so that their decisions are accepted by the religious community. Or you can see it as i stated, as it i sin many western states, this way assures that the faith develops with society, and is not a backward institution with fundamentalist views). |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 440 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 3 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 57 |
| Random fact: All role-play must respect the established cultural background in Culturally Protected nations. |
| Random quote: "There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America." - Bill Clinton |