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: Health Improvement Act Exception Clause
Details
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 2108
Description[?]:
| The ban on alchohol shall not interefere with those religions who require the use of wine in or before a certain part of their liturgy. It is only to be consumed during religious worship. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:41:51, August 28, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Correct. It shalln't, unless minimum alcoholic content is specified by liturgy. |
| Date | 23:32:15, August 28, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | This is a step to overturn the useless bill that should never have passed in the first place. We shall support it. |
| Date | 00:54:32, August 29, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | The SDP would like to introduce the RiP and th YP to some rather nice non-alcoholic wines produced in Dhataan. If you look, you might find some alcohol-free cider from Shrin Kali as well, now popular with certain local faiths as a replacement for the conventional cider they have always used. |
| Date | 01:13:25, August 29, 2005 CET | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | The Catholic CHurch requires regular wine. |
| Date | 23:18:51, August 29, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Well, will the exception then permit catholics to drink wine as they wish without the normal exemption from national health treatment? We cannot expect the taxpayer to fund liver transplants and so forth if they abuse their own health. And what about those faiths whose texts mention substances other than wine? Should they not have the same protection? And what about those religious groups which promote excessive drinking? This bill is far too vaguely worded, and needs serious attention. |
| Date | 21:05:02, August 30, 2005 CET | From | Corporate Raider Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Would we also allow marijuanna for the Rastafarians, or peyote for the Indians? What about LSD for the Jimmy Hendrixians? Any religious exception for communion would open the door to abuses of the statute. None can be allowed. |
| Date | 00:33:02, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | I agree with the Corporate Raider Party! No exceptions except for communion. |
| Date | 00:34:58, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | This is eprsecution. Back to the catecombs? |
| Date | 00:37:01, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Note it says only WINE. Also, how can you abuse it, if it is being monitered by a priest? Also, if you break in to stweal un-consecrated wine, thats breaking and entering. Besides, when given out to the congregants, it is no longer wine, but blood. |
| Date | 00:42:16, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | SDPS STATEMENT- broken apart ---------- Well, will the exception then permit catholics to drink wine as they wish without the normal exemption from national health treatment? We cannot expect the taxpayer to fund liver transplants and so forth if they abuse their own health. NO, not as they wish, only during communion, give out by an approved minister of the church, during religious worship. A sip a mass won't cause liver disease. And what about those faiths whose texts mention substances other than wine? Should they not have the same protection? Let them bring it up. And what about those religious groups which promote excessive drinking? Which one is that? This bill is far too vaguely worded, and needs serious attention. Edited a little- is that better? |
| Date | 00:45:41, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Actually, what my dear colleague from the SDP didn't tell you is that wine is actually beneficial to your health! It has been proven that wine reduces heart disease. It is beer, and not wine that causes people to have liver transplants. We are in support of this bill because we do consider it an abominition that the Health improvement act was passed to begin with. Because of it, our unemployment rate is starting to go up and they'll become a burden on our society. Think long and hard about this bill. By not passing it, you are showing your religious persecution. Christian religions uses wine at communion and they should be allowed to continue to do so. If not, then those that vote for it don't care about religious traditions. |
| Date | 03:23:42, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | We support this bill. |
| Date | 23:59:05, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Corporate Raider Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Firstly, studies ahve shown that the health benefits of wine are also found in grape juice. No alcohol is required. Secondly, I cannot support this exemption because it represents favoritism from the State to the Church. As I noted previously, legalizing wine for Christians and not legalizing marijuanna for the Rastafarians, peyote for the Indians, or LSD for the Jimmy Hendrixians would be unfair. Any religion could say any banned substance was necessary for their faith and the Government would be forced to allow it. It's a slippery slope I refuse to follow. |
| Date | 20:41:18, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Congratulations Corporate Raider Party! You have just shown yourself to be against religious practices. Christianity is one of the oldest religions around. They have full right to drink wine at communion. By not giving them permission to do so, is really disheartening to us. Hopefully the voters will see that you are preventing them from exercising their rights to drink wine during communion. |
| Date | 22:09:16, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | "Besides, when given out to the congregants, it is no longer wine, but blood." In the eyes of the believers perhaps, but we can not - if I could claim that any vodka I drank turned into water by divine intervention, would the state then say 'then you're not drinking water, so it's legal'. "A sip a mass won't cause liver disease." So, the Catholic texts require not only minimum alcohol content but also a maximum consumption volume, do they? <|If you're going to use RL religions, then I'm going to have to ask for chapter and verse|> "It is beer, and not wine that causes people to have liver transplants." It is neither, but the alcohol within! The problem with the bill is that either (as it currently stands) it is a gross act of religious discrimination by exempting one group from, or (as an exemption on religious consumption, the only) it opens the door for any and all religions requiring consumption of banned materials to have the equivalent rights. <|On an OOC point, remember this is Tukarali, not the US, Terra, not Earth - please don't assume the culture is the same.|> |
| Date | 23:50:04, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Corporate Raider Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | My learned colleague from the RiP is prone to waxing dramatic, isn't he. Against religion, indeed! I merely point out the hypocrisy in allowing one religion to use a banned substance, and not allowing other religions to do so. A religion's age has no bearing on its validity. I am perfectly happy to suport this exemption, if all religions are granted an equal exemption for the banned substances they claim they require to adequately honor their gods. It's only logical. BTW, I resent your personal attack on my religious views. I respectfully ask that you retract them. |
| Date | 01:58:59, September 02, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | OOC: Apparenlty we live in a religious nation if I'm reading the scroll bars correctly. |
| Date | 03:41:52, September 02, 2005 CET | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | The Catholic Church can't use grape juice. it is NOT valid matter for the EUcharist. ------- http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P39.HTM Code of Canon Law: Article 3 THE RITES AND CEREMONIES OF THE EUCHARISTIC CELEBRATION Can. 924 §1 The most holy Sacrifice of the Eucharist must be celebrated in bread, and in wine to which a small quantity of water is to be added. §2 The bread must be wheaten only, and recently made, so that there is no danger of corruption. ************§3 The wine must be natural, made from grapes of the vine, and not corrupt.*********** Can. 925 Holy communion is to be given under the species of bread alone or, in accordance with the liturgical laws, under both species or, in case of necessity, even under the species of wine alone. Can. 926 In the eucharistic celebration, in accordance with the ancient tradition of the latin Church, the priest is to use unleavened bread wherever he celebrates Mass. ****************Can. 927 It is absolutely wrong, even in urgent and extreme necessity, to consecrate one element without the other, or even to consecrate both outside the eucharistic celebration. ************ |
| Date | 04:17:57, September 02, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Sorry but I won't retract it because its true. But not allowing them to follow through with their religious practices as stated by my colleague by the Catholic Party, you are showing ignorance and intolerance. By not allowing the catholic church to use real wine in there services, you are in effect, telling them that they can't follow their religious beliefs. I'm sorry but that is precisely what you are doing. I suggest that you retract your bill and allow for alcohol to go back to where it was before you ordered your ban and placed hundreds if not thousands of people out of work. |
| Date | 20:43:26, September 02, 2005 CET | From | Corporate Raider Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Your acrimony astounds me, RiP. I have said I'd support allowing the use of wine in religious services, as long as we also allow other faiths to use whichever banned substances they feel are necessarty in order to worship appropriately. Do you support that? If not, I suggest you look in a mirror when yoou want to aim unfair accusations at someone. Either all are entitled or all are denied. You pick. |
| Date | 22:21:56, September 02, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | "OOC: Apparenlty we live in a religious nation if I'm reading the scroll bars correctly." <|Religious does not mean the majority are Christians any more than it means the majority is Sikh, Buddhist, Atheist or followers of the Prophet Tukral.|> "you are in effect, telling them that they can't follow their religious beliefs" Their religion is their own matter: so long as they abide by the same rules as everyone else, fine. But if you say an action must be legal and/or protected by law simply because it is a religious belief, then any action, from the consumption of illegal substances to outright murder is legal if committed in the name of religion. If a religion suggests its believers do that which is illegal in Tukarali, then the SDP is quite happy to accept that we are telling them that they can't perform their rites. They're welcome to hold whatever beliefs they like, and indeed to convey those beliefs to others, should they wish. Moreover, the SDP still disputes that minimum alcohol consumption is an integral or necessary part of Catholicism. |
| Date | 23:22:51, September 02, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | I think this whole ban should be overturned period. We warned you there would be problems and now our prophecy has come true. To my colleague who of the catholic party, I am asking you kind sir, to add an amendment to overturn this worthless bill so that we can regain the employment that we lost and that all christian sects that use wine in communion can do so legally without having to create a special law for you to do so. |
| Date | 18:24:34, September 03, 2005 CET | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | That belongs in a seperate bill. |
| Date | 22:20:11, September 03, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | "We warned you there would be problems and now our prophecy has come true." In the same way as a jockey who bets against his own horse rarely loses his money. "I think this whole ban should be overturned period." Good for you. You're welcome to propose it, as the YP has rightly decided to keep the amendment under its current premise. |
| Date | 18:00:02, September 04, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | I am urging all of my colleagues here in the Tribal Council to approve this bill. This bill is important to those of us who are religious and use wine in our ceremonies. By preventing us from using wine at our services, you are, in effect, violating our rights to practice our religion. Do you honestly want to be remembered as a party that fails to protect our freedom of religion by not passing this bill? |
| Date | 23:38:06, September 04, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | The supporters of this bill are misguided it their conceptions. Not only has there been a complete failure on their part to provide any evidence (beyond the repeated assertion) that alcohol is a required component of any religious service, but also, the supporters have not provided any reasons why religion should allow its believers to ignore the law. They have also simply ingored the issue of the religious prejudice with which this bill treats almost all religions in Tukarali - hardly an insignificant issue when the RiP claims that the bill is supposed "to protect our freedom of religion". As we have already said (and to which no relevant reply has been made): "Their religion is their own matter: so long as they abide by the same rules as everyone else, fine. But if you say an action must be legal and/or protected by law simply because it is a religious belief, then any action, from the consumption of illegal substances to outright murder is legal if committed in the name of religion. If a religion suggests its believers do that which is illegal in Tukarali, then the SDP is quite happy to accept that we are telling them that they can't perform their rites. They're welcome to hold whatever beliefs they like, and indeed to convey those beliefs to others, should they wish." |
| Date | 01:07:55, September 05, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | Ladies and Gentlemen, The SDP has shown their contempt for religious tradition. We cannot let this abominition continue. This bill must pass so that those of us that require to drink wine during communion can. The current bill that passed has prohibited us from doing so and that is not tolerable. If this bill fails to pass, then what right will be taken away next? |
| Date | 20:58:06, September 05, 2005 CET | From | Corporate Raider Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | SDP has a point. Shell we legalize murder so that Pagans can practice human sacrifice? How about relaxing the cruelty to animal laws so as to allow animal sacrifice? It really is a slippery slope. |
| Date | 23:03:42, September 05, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | "The SDP has shown their contempt for religious tradition." Not at all, (see explanations above) and certainly no more than the supporters of this bill have for fairness and equality before the eyes of the law. "If this bill fails to pass, then what right will be taken away next?" This again hinges on either the assumption that there is a right to do whatever you like in the name of religion, or the assumption that there is a right to consume alcohol. Or both, of course. Would that the RiP make it clear which is their stand. Now, rather than making the same accusations over and over again (no, we're not going to respond to it every time you bring it up), will the RiP actually try to contest any of the points made by the SDP? |
| Date | 18:13:52, September 08, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | To the Catholic Party. Do to a shakeup on the tribal council, we have enough votes to pass the Repealing act. We are requesting that this bill be resended. |
| Date | 21:06:01, September 09, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Health Improvement Act Exception Clause |
| Message | This bill has passed the Tribal Council. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 152 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 80 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 67 |
| Random fact: Any RP law granting extraordinary "emergency powers" or dictator-like powers to a government must be passed by at least a 2/3rds majority, but (like all RP laws) may always be overturned by a simple majority vote of the legislature. |
| Random quote: "One day our descendants will think it incredible that we paid so much attention to things like the amount of melanin in our skin or the shape of our eyes or our gender instead of the unique identities of each of us as complex human beings." - Franklin Thomas |