Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: November 5471
Next month in: 02:44:22
Server time: 09:15:37, April 19, 2024 CET
Currently online (3): AethanKal | Dx6743 | itsjustgav | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Freedom of Religion Act

Details

Submitted by[?]: Progressive Populist Party

Status[?]: passed

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 4227

Description[?]:

To ensure that the state does not use its powers to condone or condemn any system of belief or religious organization.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date21:14:10, June 15, 2017 CET
FromSocial Liberal Party
ToDebating the Freedom of Religion Act
MessageOur focus on Freedom of Religion does not only implies that religion can be chosen and pratised freely, but also that no religion is imposed or pushed towards anyone against their will.

Religious schools are places where religions are imposed over defenseless children. Schools are no place for religion but for science, history, knowledge and facts. Temples are appropriate places for religion instead.

While exercising their duties, public officials are representing the people, and consequently religious symbols worn by those public officials go against the religious freedom of those represented by the official.

And on fiscal matters, we have always defended that all companies must follow the same tax framework. If religious corporations make profits, then these profits must be thoroughly taxed the same as the profits of any other company, wherever the money comes from.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
     

Total Seats: 180

no
  

Total Seats: 80

abstain
 

Total Seats: 5


Random fact: Players who consent to a particular role-play by acknowledging it in their own role-play cannot then disown it or withdraw their consent from it. For example, if player A role-plays the assassination of player B's character, and player B then acknowledges the assassination in a news post, but then backtracks and insists the assassination did not happen, then he will be required under the rules to accept the validity of the assassination role-play.

Random quote: "A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." - Dwight D. Eisenhower

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 57