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: Second Secular Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Social Liberal 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 4243
Description[?]:
| Since religious feeling is a stricly private fact, our party think that government should not allow to influence public life of Hutorian citizens, much less our education system. Leonard Cunningham (Sl-KE) Social Liberal Senate leader Senator for Saint Adrain |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The governments stance on religious schools.
Old value:: Any religion may set up a school, but they are strictly regulated.
Current: Any religion may set up a school, but they are strictly regulated.
Proposed: Religious schools are not allowed.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The state's policy concerning religious clothing.
Old value:: There are no laws regulating the wearing of religious clothing and the wearing of religious symbols.
Current: There are no laws regulating the wearing of religious clothing and the wearing of religious symbols.
Proposed: It is not permitted to wear religious clothing or religious symbols in public buildings.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 06:17:05, July 17, 2017 CET | From | National Progress Party | To | Debating the Second Secular Act |
| Message | Mr. Spekaer While we completely agree with the second article. We disagree with the first article, making it a crime to enter in a public building while wearing a religious symbol is WAY too restrictive. -Daphne Chang Senator and former Prime Minister |
| Date | 16:39:36, July 17, 2017 CET | From | Federal Heritage Party of Hutori | To | Debating the Second Secular Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, What reasoning does the SLP have for their assertion that religion is a "private fact"? Furthermore, what do they mean by private fact? Do they mean that it is something that is true in private and not in public? Because, this is utterly false if something is true in private it's truth value does not change by making it public. It would be true regardless of who knew about. Perhaps the SLP means that religion is simply not a public matter. However, this too is blatantly false as religion has always been a public and private affair. It is the very nature of religion to affect every aspect of a person and if what they hold to is correct then we wouldn't just be hindering freedom by passing this law we would be committing one of the most heinous crimes, the suppression of truth. Senator Wyatt McLaughlin (F-AD) Federalist Senate Leader |
| Date | 16:45:41, July 17, 2017 CET | From |  Liberal Party of Hutori | To | Debating the Second Secular Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker At best this is a infringement of Hutorian values for Freedom of Religion. The government is officially secular; why we are choosing to suppress those who wish to observe their faith in their own way is entirely beyond us. We will not support this measure. Fredrick Drumf Conservative Senate Leader Senator for Acton West Village |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 248 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 352 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| 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: "If Lincoln were alive today, he’d be turning over in his grave." - Gerald Ford |