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 Freedom
Details
Submitted by[?]: Grand National 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: June 3336
Description[?]:
| The GNP believes that the same tolerant policy this nation is pursuing with regards to civil rights in general should also apply to people who are following a faith. The current policies are way too harsh and should be adjusted in order to ensure religious freedom while still maintaining the principle of secularism. Elizabeth de Burgh GNP Parliamentary Group Leader |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards evangelism and religious advertising.
Old value:: Religious organizations are not permitted to actively promote themselves or advertise, however evangelism is permitted by individuals.
Current: Religions are permitted to freely promote and advertise themselves.
Proposed: Religions are permitted to freely promote and advertise themselves.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The state's policy concerning religious clothing.
Old value:: Public officials are not allowed to wear religious symbols while exercising their duties.
Current: Public officials are not allowed to wear religious symbols while exercising their duties.
Proposed: There are no laws regulating the wearing of religious clothing and the wearing of religious symbols.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning religions.
Old value:: There is no official state religion, but the government only allows recognized religions. 'Cults' are persecuted.
Current: There is no official state religion, but the government only allows recognized religions. 'Cults' are persecuted.
Proposed: There is no government policy concerning a state religion.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:20:34, July 17, 2012 CET | From | Frente Amplio de Acción Democrática | To | Debating the Religious Freedom |
| Message | PAC completely favors article 1 of this proposal. However, article 2 we do agree upon, but we would require that the same laws that apply to advertisement be applied in this case, no more and no less. As for article 3, this point we cannot agree on, and is the reason why PAC votes nay. In actuality, there are no laws on a federal level that regulate the wearing of religious clothing or symbols other than the one regulation that only applies to public officials. This point alone compromise the state's principle of secularism. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes |
Total Seats: 86 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 154 | ||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 10 |
| Random fact: Real-life organisations should not be referenced in Particracy, unless they are simple and generic (eg. "National Organisation for Women" is allowed). |
| Random quote: "Radical left-wing ideologies must be stamped out." - Franklin McCarthy, former Solentian politician |