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: Secularisation Bill (2148)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Deltarian Nationalist 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: May 2151
Description[?]:
| This bill will help prevent the spread of fanaticism in Hobrazia. By screening missionaries and by putting forward candidates for religious positions we can make sure nobody using religion to preach against the state will be allowed to gain a position of authority here in Hobrazia. Religious promoting will now come under Government supervision as all advertising does. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning the visitation of foreign missionaries.
Old value:: The government has no policy concerning the visitation of foreign missionaries.
Current: The government selectively screens which religions are permitted to send missionaries to the nation. Certain religions are approved and travel is unregulated.
Proposed: The government determines which missionaries are permitted to visit on a person by person basis.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The state's intervention in the appointment of ministers of religion.
Old value:: The state does not intervene in the appointment of ministers of any religion whatsoever.
Current: The state has the right to veto the appointment of any ministers of religion.
Proposed: The state appoints the head and ministers of the state religion, but does not intervene otherwise.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards evangelism and religious advertising.
Old value:: Religions are permitted to freely promote and advertise themselves.
Current: Religions are permitted to freely promote and advertise themselves.
Proposed: Religions are required to obtain government approval before promoting themselves or advertising in any manner.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:12:16, November 30, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Secularisation Bill (2148) |
| Message | Three nos here. The state must be seperate from religion |
| Date | 21:27:05, November 30, 2005 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the Secularisation Bill (2148) |
| Message | No, no, no. Why should the government intervene in the affairs of religion? Article 1: Religious repression aside, this would tie up too many resources that could be used for better purposes. Article 2: Hell no. Why should the government nominate ministers? This is absurd and is a greivous breach of the fundamental right of religious expression. Article 3: This would allow for religious bias in the government, which could influence which religions received more attention from the populace. Aside from the fact that all of these articles are direct attacks upon essential civil liberties, your argument in the bill description is flawed. There is little evidence for "fanaticism" in the Republic. The fact that a Christian party has organized and has never tried to use its political influence to promote religion or serve an agenda is proof enough that this is unnecessary. Also, you claim that these will prevent religious figures from preaching against the state. There are two basic arguments against this. The first is that a characteristic of a free and democratic state is to have open political discourse. By removing voices of opposition that you'd rather not here, you are greatly undermining these inherent rights. The second argument is that there are different types of authority. Just because a priest, imam, or rabbi holds a certain religous authority over his or her congregation does not mean that this is the same as political authority. Christianity in particular makes this distinction clear and encourages its adherents to abide by governmental laws ("Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and give to God what is God's" Mark 12:17). This bill is oppressive, and we urge all sensible Hobrazian parties to vote against. Its arguments are flawed and its aims are totalitarian. |
| Date | 14:45:52, December 01, 2005 CET | From | Deltarian Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Secularisation Bill (2148) |
| Message | "its aims are totalitarian" well i'm not exactly going to be liberal am i? |
| Date | 16:09:21, December 02, 2005 CET | From | Capitalizt Party | To | Debating the Secularisation Bill (2148) |
| Message | Lol, I think CSP wrote it on purpose. We support what CSP said anyway. |
| Date | 03:18:52, December 03, 2005 CET | From |  Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Secularisation Bill (2148) |
| Message | I agree with CSP and will join my collegues in opposing this. And I thought the Totalitarian of the TPoH was just an unsubstantiated claim, but this is rather totalitarian even for the TPoH. Nein! |
| Date | 17:24:54, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Deltarian Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Secularisation Bill (2148) |
| Message | lol, very good. I'd say i'm towards the stalinist rather than the nazi totalitarian. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 79 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 280 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 41 |
| Random fact: You can view who's online (i.e. been active the last 10 minutes) at the bottom of the menu (either at the top or the side). |
| Random quote: "It would be nice if the poor were to get even half of the money that is spent in studying them." - Bill Vaughan |