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 Education
Details
Submitted by[?]: Militarist Party
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: November 2442
Description[?]:
| A change in the policy on religious schools |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The governments stance on religious schools.
Old value:: Any religion may set up a school, but they are strictly regulated.
Current: Only recognised religions may set up religious schools, with no regulations.
Proposed: Only recognised religions may set up religious schools, with no regulations.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:27:40, August 11, 2007 CET | From | Militarist Party | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | Why should there be regulations on religious education? It is not like there is some conspiracy and they are "brainwashing" our children. If there should be any regulation, it should be that recognized, legal religions should be able to set up school. |
| Date | 14:54:24, August 11, 2007 CET | From | New Conservative Party of Malivia | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | Is it not still regulation to say that only religions we recognise can set up schools? The way it is now, even a minor group can set up a school, so long as they conform to educational standards that we expect as lawmakers. By saying that only the religions we recognise are allowed to open schools, you simply make us a more close-minded, restrictive society, and the New Conservative Party will not accept that. We say that the old way, for the time being, is the best way, this is in no way deregulation, if anything, it is greater regulation. |
| Date | 19:50:22, August 11, 2007 CET | From | National Anti-Communist Front | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | The MNP believes that only government funded public schools should exist, as such we will probably abstain from this bill. |
| Date | 22:04:01, August 11, 2007 CET | From |  Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | We will support the Militarist Party in this motion. Controlling religious education limits the ability of parents to teach their children of their culture and heritage. However there does exist some religions which abuse children and otherwise brainwash their youth. By forcing a religion to gain enough acceptance in Malivia to become recognized by the government we strike a balance between government control and freedoms. |
| Date | 00:17:26, August 12, 2007 CET | From | New Conservative Party of Malivia | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | We already control and regulate religious education. We ensure that any religion that opens a school must conform to certain standards. Why worry about brainwashing, when we already prevent it? |
| Date | 05:09:37, August 12, 2007 CET | From | United Malivia | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | Am I to believe, that by the words of the Protectorate Party, there is a religious conspiracy in which children are being brainwashed? If so I think it would be fair to say that all religious schools are banned, on the reason that they are brainwashing innocent minds. However, if this is not what you meant to say then I believe that we should allow all religions to set up schools, with strict regulations. This means that there will be no brainwashing, due to the fact that the schools are heavily regulated by the government, and it also means that we will allow the freedom of religion in Malivia. This makes the most sense to us. |
| Date | 09:04:27, August 12, 2007 CET | From | Malivian National Unity Front | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | The M.N.U.F. respectfully agrees with the position the M.N.P. has taken. There is no need for religion to be taught at the expense of tax payers. If children are to be taught such items, it is the choice of the parents not the government. |
| Date | 12:28:11, August 12, 2007 CET | From | Peoples Movement for an Obedient Society | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | Unregulated religious practice is dangerous and cannot be supported by my party. |
| Date | 23:11:14, August 12, 2007 CET | From | Supporters of Science in Design (IP) | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | For the same reason as PMfaOS we vote no. |
| Date | 07:04:31, August 14, 2007 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | Perhaps we were unclear. We meant that a recognized religion has been regulated already by the government in order to become recognized. We have examined their practices and have found them reasonable. Thus further regulations are unneeded. To permit unrecognized religions free rein, would perhaps permit practices that we as a society do not permit. |
| Date | 07:36:25, August 14, 2007 CET | From | Malivian National Unity Front | To | Debating the Religious Education |
| Message | To the Protectorate Party, While it is without doubt you have the best interests of the Malivian people by this proposal. However, there are glaring issues with your latest clarification that the M.N.U.F. feels must be brought to attention. I clearly abstained from this vote on the basis aforementioned. It is not the view of the M. N. U. F. for this Republic to regulate religion in any fashion, whatsoever. There are inevitable instances where upstart religious groups, dare I say cults pose a serious danger to either Malvians or the members within the parent organization. I remind my esteemed collegues from the P.P. that we live within a Republic and not a theocracy. With your latest clarification your colors seem to shine through by making a declaring that quote, "To permit unrecognized religions free reign, would perhaps permit practices that we as a society do not permit." Dare I ask, whom made you judge, trial and jury over what religion poses a threat? We live in a free Republic and the Malivians deserve the right to personal liberty which entitles a freedom of choice. I do agree with you in sentiment. If there is a religion that poses a risk to society as a whole, the government of Malivia must step in or the regional level authorities. This isn't something the Federal Republic of Malivia needs to concern itself with. If we're picking and choosing what religion is right and wrong; what's next, everyone must have the same hair-cut? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 145 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 223 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 232 |
| Random fact: You can inactivate yourself on your User Page. You will then lose all your seats but your party account won't be deleted, and your party's Visibility ratings will not diminish. Reactivation can be requested in the "Reactivation Requests" thread in the Game Moderation section of the Particracy Forum. |
| Random quote: "I am a conservative to preserve all that is good in our constitution, a radical to remove all that is bad. I seek to preserve property and to respect order, and I equally decry the appeal to the passions of the many or the prejudices of the few." - Benjamin Disraeli |