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 Act of 2189
Details
Submitted by[?]: DaVidan Theological Monarchist Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2189
Description[?]:
| To encourage democracy within the Church of Tukarali, the following articles will be implemented: 1. The Religious Council is established, comprising 30 members- the 20 senior bishops of the Church and 10 other ministers of the Church of Tukarali chosen by the Head of State. 2. The Archbishop of Tukcity appoints his successor, this decision must then be ratified by the Religious Council. If the Religious Council refuse the nominated successor, the Archbishop of Tukcity can nominate other candidates, or the Religious Council can nominate candidates themselves. 3. Once the candidate is confirmed by the Religious Council, the Grand Tribal Council will vote upon the candidate. If they refuse the candidate, the Religious Council restarts the selection process. 4. If the Religious Council declares a vote of no confidence in the leadership of the Archbishop of Tukcity then the selection process for a new Archbishop of Tukcity will begin. However, the Grand Tribal Council can overwrite the vote of no confidence by the Religious Council. 5. Similarly, the Grand Tribal Council can declare a vote of no confidence in the Archbishop of Tukcity, which would cause a new leadership contest. However, the Religious Council can overwrite the vote of no confidence by the Grand Tribal Council. This ensures a 'checks and balances' system, which ensures both the Church and the Government have an equal say of power in the selection of the Archbishop of Tukcity. 6. All ministers are appointed by the Head of State, however all internal promotions are carried out by the Religious Council. This again ensures a 'checks and balances' system, to ensure that the Head of State does not gain too much power over the Church or the Grand Tribal Council. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 09:59:10, February 17, 2006 CET | From | DaVidan Theological Monarchist Party | To | Debating the Religious Act of 2189 |
| Message | We believe that the Church should retain some freedom from political interference, however we recognise the need for some control from the government over the Church. We propose the following to ensure the stability of the Church of Tukarali in future. 1. The Religious Council is established, comprising 30 members- the 20 senior bishops of the Church and 10 other ministers of the Church of Tukarali chosen by the Head of State. 2. The Archbishop of Tukcity appoints his successor, this decision must then be ratified by the Religious Council. If the Religious Council refuse the nominated successor, the Archbishop of Tukcity can nominate other candidates, or the Religious Council can nominate candidates themselves. 3. Once the candidate is confirmed by the Religious Council, the Grand Tribal Council will vote upon the candidate. If they refuse the candidate, the Religious Council restarts the selection process. 4. If the Religious Council declares a vote of no confidence in the leadership of the Archbishop of Tukcity then the selection process for a new Archbishop of Tukcity will begin. However, the Grand Tribal Council can overwrite the vote of no confidence by the Religious Council. 5. Similarly, the Grand Tribal Council can declare a vote of no confidence in the Archbishop of Tukcity, which would cause a new leadership contest. However, the Religious Council can overwrite the vote of no confidence by the Grand Tribal Council. This ensures a 'checks and balances' system, which ensures both the Church and the Government have an equal say of power in the selection of the Archbishop of Tukcity. 6. All ministers are appointed by the Head of State, however all internal promotions are carried out by the Religious Council. This again ensures a 'checks and balances' system, to ensure that the Head of State does not gain too much power over the Church or the Grand Tribal Council. Any thoughts? |
| Date | 09:58:23, February 18, 2006 CET | From | DaVidan Theological Monarchist Party | To | Debating the Religious Act of 2189 |
| Message | Does anybody object to this? |
| Date | 10:14:04, February 18, 2006 CET | From | Social-Conservative party | To | Debating the Religious Act of 2189 |
| Message | Not me atleast. |
| Date | 00:12:53, February 19, 2006 CET | From | One Nation Socialist Party | To | Debating the Religious Act of 2189 |
| Message | we shall think on this. But we are encouraged by this proposal. |
| Date | 00:15:50, February 22, 2006 CET | From | One Nation Socialist Party | To | Debating the Religious Act of 2189 |
| Message | please waith for patriot and rightist before voting. As a compromise we shall support but please refrain from putting future bills to vote. And we, just for the record didn't fund any insurgency in Albadara or whatever it is called. |
| Date | 17:15:20, February 22, 2006 CET | From | DaVidan Theological Monarchist Party | To | Debating the Religious Act of 2189 |
| Message | OOC: I'm refraining from going to vote with all the other bills, but because this contains no proposals it won't effect their visibility or anything so I thought it fair to go ahead. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 225 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 74 |
| Random fact: When it comes to creating a Cultural Protocol in a Culturally Open nation, players are not necessarily required to provide a plausible backstory for how the nation's cultural background developed. However, the provision of a plausible backstory may be a factor in whether Moderation approves the Cultural Protocol if players in surrounding nations question its appropriateness for their region of the game map. |
| Random quote: "When there's a single thief, it's robbery. When there are a thousand thieves, it's taxation. " -Vanya Cohen |