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 Act 2564
Details
Submitted by[?]: Vanuku Freedom 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: January 2567
Description[?]:
| Sec. 1 SHORT TITLE This act may be cited as the 'Religious Education Act 2564' Sec. 2 PROVISIONS The state shall not interfere with the operation of any educational institution of a religious nature. Sec. 3 EFFECTIVENESS The provisions of this act shall take effect immediately. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The governments stance on religious schools.
Old value:: Religious schools are allowed, but are strictly regulated. Only recognised religions may set up religious schools.
Current: Religious schools are allowed, but are strictly regulated. Only recognised religions may set up religious schools.
Proposed: Any religion may set up a school, with no regulations.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:32:29, April 22, 2008 CET | From | Vanuku Sinatranoan Party | To | Debating the Religious Education Act 2564 |
| Message | Opinion Piece from the "Vanuku Federation Daily", written by "High Pathetical" Argy Meant, Press Secretary for the Vanuku Sinatranoan Party. The People of Vanuku may be aware of proposed legislation being debated in the Grand Council at present. The Vanuku Freedom Party wants any religion to be able to set up a school with no restictions. Also, "(t)he state shall not interfere with the operation of any educational institution of a religious nature". The Vanuku Sinatranoan Party wishes to raise a hypothetical situation: Suppose a new religion forms, called the "Blow All Nationals of Vanuku To Hell" Faith. Do you let them build a (militaristic) school with the necessary equipment and curriculum to ensure their devotion? At the risk of sounding crude: No regulation our arse! The Vanuku Freedom Party should get a sense of perspective, and start proposing legislation with significantly less loopholes! Because right now they've things wide open... "Sec. 2 PROVISIONS The state shall not interfere with the operation of _ANY_ educational institution of a religious nature." And: "Proposed: Any religion may set up a school, with _NO_ regulations." What defines "religion"? Currently, any crackpot can devise half-baked ideals and call them a "religion". Vanuku deserves some informed debate occuring early on in clearly defined legislation, otherwise these parties are merely wasting our time. The people of Vanuku are much more intelligent than that. And it is becoming increasingly obvious why the Vanuku Freedom Party agrees with 75% of the Liberal Republican Union's legislation currently being voted upon... they both love sweeping facts and concisive opening arguments under the carpet of obfuscation, and are unwilling to allow their blinkered ideals to be exposed to rational, reasonable debate. Vanuku deserves better. |
| Date | 21:48:27, April 22, 2008 CET | From | Vanuku Freedom Party | To | Debating the Religious Education Act 2564 |
| Message | The issue here is simple, and it is one of fundamental liberty. The current law infringes upon the religious liberty of Vanukans, and is therefore incompatible with the fundamental principles of the Vanukan state. It is really that simple: either one believes in freedom of religion, or one does not. As for Mr. Meant's hypothetical example, quite simply, if the actions of the members of this new 'religion' are, in and of themselves, illegal, then they are illegal. No particular regulation is needed. |
| Date | 06:28:22, April 23, 2008 CET | From | Federalist Party of Vanuku | To | Debating the Religious Education Act 2564 |
| Message | From the Office of the Minister of Education and Culture: To the Vanuku Freedom Party, I have been looking over this piece of legislation here, and I have found some pros, and I have found some cons. Lets start with the Pros: I think the overall idea for this bill is good in nature, and that a change is definilty needed. Cons: But In my opinion the proposal that has been laid out in the bill is not the best choice. I believe we can have our cake and eat it too. So with that In mind here are my recommendations: 1. We should allow any religion to set up schools, but they must adhere to Government regulations. 2. Change the proposal to reflect the above information. Justin Brown Minister of Education and Culture |
| Date | 02:53:54, April 24, 2008 CET | From | Vanuku Nationalists Party | To | Debating the Religious Education Act 2564 |
| Message | We will support our Minister in this debate. |
| Date | 23:45:48, April 24, 2008 CET | From | Vanuku Freedom Party | To | Debating the Religious Education Act 2564 |
| Message | While we appreciate the Ministers' input, we cannot agree, as it would still represent unconscionable restriction of religious freedom. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 95 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Character names must appear plausible and should consist of at least a first name and a surname. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented |
| Random quote: "We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant." - Karl Popper |