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: Secular Education Take Two
Details
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 2110
Description[?]:
| The nation's schools shall be houses of learning, not indocrination. Note: Religious schools are exempt from Article 2. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The governments stance on religious schools.
Old value:: Any religion may set up a school, with no regulations.
Current: Only recognised religions may set up religious schools, with no regulations.
Proposed: Any religion may set up a school, but they are strictly regulated.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Sexual education in schools.
Old value:: This decision is up to the schools themselves without government regulation.
Current: Schools have an obligation to give sexual education at some point in puberty, but individual students have an opt-out option.
Proposed: Schools have an obligation to give sexual education at some point in puberty.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The teacher's right to discipline children.
Old value:: Discipline levels are set by schools.
Current: Teachers are forbidden from striking children and may only use non-contact discipline (detention, expulsion etc).
Proposed: Teachers are forbidden from striking children and may only use non-contact discipline (detention, expulsion etc).
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:02:05, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Royal Conservative Party | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | So you seek to turn schools into political backgrounds for pushing your pseudo-Marxist bull? Grow up and leave the children out of your communist crusade. If schools want to impose prayers or remove sex education, then that should be up to them as apolitical institutions. They are not weapons for you to fight your war with, they are places of learning. |
| Date | 20:27:43, September 10, 2005 CET | From |  National People's Gang | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | Sex education is learning and therefore it is appropriate in schools. Worship is not learning, so is therefore inappropriate in schools. |
| Date | 21:52:17, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | We wold be more confortable with leaving the decisions on these matters to the schools themselves. We can support regulation of religious schools to ensure they provide quality education rather than indoctrination. |
| Date | 22:46:18, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Royal Conservative Party | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | "Worship is not learning, so is therefore inappropriate in schools." Read the Bible recently? There is a great deal to learn from it about morality and the way to lead a good and decent life. Admittedly, there is also a great deal of rubbish in there as well but religion in schools can help pupils see these defects in religiom and therefore side step them. |
| Date | 23:21:00, September 10, 2005 CET | From | National People's Gang | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | This proposal does not prohibit studies of The Bible, The Qur'an, The Mahabharata, Guru Granth Sahib, The Tanakh, The Purvas, The Tao Te Ching, The Song of the Angel or any other scripture or religious text, all of which give guidance on morality and the way to lead a good and decent life. It prohibits teacher-led prayers. Prayers are worship, they are between a person and their deity and it is not for school teachers to presume they can 'lead' such a dialogue. |
| Date | 23:26:32, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | If the private education system of Lodamun is to be dismantled, I would ask that article 2 be put into a separate bill so that we can support it...With school choice, provided by the voucher system, things are entirely different than government sponsored prayer. |
| Date | 23:57:09, September 10, 2005 CET | From | National People's Gang | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | TiC is currently voting against a proposal which maintains private provision of education. |
| Date | 00:10:04, September 11, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | We are voting against a proposal that involves the government in many areas where it simply does not belong, yes. |
| Date | 05:21:12, September 11, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | ((Didn't have any available proposals until now so another one has been added.)) |
| Date | 10:01:40, September 11, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | Can article 2 please be removed and put in a separate bill? TiC only supports the current value if students and parents have complete freedom of choice as to which school they go to. |
| Date | 03:07:22, September 12, 2005 CET | From | Royal Conservative Party | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | Deeply opposed to article 3. |
| Date | 04:32:49, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Secular Education Take Two |
| Message | support articles one and three, but opposed to article two. On balance, then, we will vote yes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 160 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 112 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The Real-Life Equivalents Index is a valuable resource for finding out the in-game equivalents of real-life cultures, languages, religions, people and places: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6731 |
| Random quote: "The word 'politics' is derived from the word 'poly', meaning 'many', and the word 'ticks', meaning 'blood sucking parasites.'" - Larry Hardiman |