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: Faith Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Beluzian Traditional 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 4135
Description[?]:
| We propose the following: |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change
Taxation of religious institutions.
Old value:: Religions are treated as companies, and all profit is taxed, however, charitable donations are not taxed.
Current: No religions are taxed.
Proposed: Recognized religions are not taxed.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Remuneration of ministers of religion.
Old value:: The salaries and pensions of ministers of religion shall be borne by the state and regulated by the law.
Current: The salaries and pensions of ministers of religions shall be regulated by the law, but shall be borne by the religious communities themselves.
Proposed: The state does not intervene in the remuneration of ministers of religion.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards evangelism and religious advertising.
Old value:: Religions are required to obtain government approval before promoting themselves or advertising in any manner.
Current: Religions are permitted to freely promote and advertise themselves.
Proposed: Religions are permitted to freely promote and advertise themselves.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:53:25, December 12, 2016 CET | From | Beluzian Traditional Party | To | Debating the Faith Act |
| Message | The deep religious values at the heart of our party are no secret, and we make no bones about standing up for the rights of the Church and other religious organizations. I respect that many members of the assembly don't share our views, however we hope they will be able to see the sense outlined in these proposals. Firstly, the taxation of religious institutions is profoundly criminal. Churches are funded entirely by donations and are not run for profit. It is a grotesque manipulation of justice that religious institutions are treated like corporations. When you look at the positive effects promoted by religious organizations - charity, the running of schools, the building of community, it is an absolute travesty that the government would seek to profit off of them and therefore discourage this type of activity. The second article concerns the pay of ministers. It is an absurdity that ministers should rely on the government for their salary. Not only is it an unnecessary strain on the public purse, but it is unfair on ministers who are often left at the bottom of the pile of priorities by the atheistic governments we've come to expect. Finally, the third article speaks for itself. Nobody, religious or not, should require government permission to speak and advertise their opinions. This is a fundamental hypocrisy in a system that claims to value freedom of speech. I hope members will join with me and voting for this desperately needed reform. - Assemblyman Isaac Keltcher, Leader of the Traditional Party |
| Date | 21:00:42, December 12, 2016 CET | From | Freedom Socialist Party | To | Debating the Faith Act |
| Message | Noble Leader! Thank you for the inspired and eloquent speech! We appreciate anyone who cares to make an point to the other voting parties in this Assembly about what their own party thinks. It helps building trust and possible diallogues. Like you did in this matter. The problem with most of those multi-proposals bill is that often enough we find ourselves in agreement with some of them, but can't vote yes because of some other. That's what happened here for us of the PCP. Article 3 is an necessity. This needs to change and if this bill doesn't pass, our party is comitting to you and the people right now: we will go after this particular issue again. Being an Secular State does not mean controlling our citizens' own choices when it comes to religion. They have to be free to make that decision by themselves. That's why we are so sorry your party put that huge need of change together with some proposals we just cannot agree. Like Article 1. Friends, the law states that all the "profits" are taxed. We don't touch their donations, ever. There's also a lot of other problems with this proposed tax exemption. For instance: this will give the burden to the State to declare what is a religion and what isn't. That could mean corruption and fraud. To prevent said frauds, it could mean government being prejudicial against groups that considered themselves "religion" but don't have enough political pull to convince the commitee. Not to mention many churches and synagogues sit on exceedingly valuable tracts of land. The property taxes they wouldn't be paying would have to be drawn from business owners and private citizens. Even if they're not religious, that would mean they would be the ones subsidizing religious temples. We don't think that's ok. Defenders of tax exemptions and deductions argue that if we don't use them charitable giving drops. It surely does, although how much, we can’t say. But of course government revenue goes up, and that money can be used to, say, house the homeless and feed the hungry. Like we do. We have fewer church soup kitchens — but countries that truly care about poverty don’t rely on churches to run soup kitchens. Article 2 could be more discussed as well, but we won't. We said enough for now. And I think we made our point. We have to vote no thanks to Article 1. But Article 3 HAS to be voted again. If this bill loses, again we say, we will commit to you and give you our world that we will bring this issue to public voting again. Dr. Douglas Coutinho PhD in History and Education President and Founder of the People's Coutinho Party |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 133 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 308 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 159 |
| Random fact: The majority of nations in Particracy are "Culturally Protected" with an established cultural background. Only the "Culturally Open" nations are not bound by the rules surrounding culture. The Cultural Protocols Index should be consulted for more information about the cultural situation of each nation. |
| Random quote: "I have no faith in political arithmetic." - Adam Smith |