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 Clothing Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: We Say So! 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: September 2137
Description[?]:
| In order to guarantee the seperation of religion and Government, public officials in the pay of either National or Regional Government are not allowed wear obvious religious symbols or clothing when carrying out their duties. This law does not effect what religions can be involved in Governance, nor does it limit what clothing or symbols may be worn when said officials are not involved in Government business outside of their working environment. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The state's policy concerning religious clothing.
Old value:: There are no laws regulating the wearing of religious clothing and the wearing of religious symbols.
Current: There are no laws regulating the wearing of religious clothing and the wearing of religious symbols.
Proposed: Public officials are not allowed to wear religious symbols while exercising their duties.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:36:16, November 06, 2005 CET | From | Hobrazia First | To | Debating the Religious Clothing Act |
| Message | Fair enough |
| Date | 21:50:37, November 06, 2005 CET | From |  Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Religious Clothing Act |
| Message | Whats the problem if they don't preach or read from the bible? It's only a symbol. They should have the right to wear it. |
| Date | 22:00:34, November 06, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Religious Clothing Act |
| Message | It's the whole law we have of seperation of church and State. This guarantees they are seperate and that citizens can't use the argument of "X supports Y religion and I felt uncomfortable looking at their *choose religious icon*". And they are allowed to wear it, just not when exercising their duties. |
| Date | 22:05:46, November 06, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Religious Clothing Act |
| Message | Church and state, not symbols and state. It's just a symbol, not promotion and I don't think church and state seperation apply to this. If people are offended by just an icon, then that's their problem. Civil liberties apply to everybody within the law. |
| Date | 19:38:45, November 07, 2005 CET | From | Left Communist Party | To | Debating the Religious Clothing Act |
| Message | Freedom of religion is an important tenet of the EUP's manifesto (OOC: if I was to write one, that is). |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 174 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 226 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| 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: "'The illusion of Pontesi nationhood'. The Serpent speaks. How can they say these things? How can they call our country an illusion? You can see it clear as day, these people won’t stop until they’ve destroyed us all." - Morgan Einar, former Pontesian general |