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 Reform Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Monarchist 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: August 2194
Description[?]:
| The Monarchist Party, recognizing their own Christian values and alignment; acknowledging the majority religious affiliation within Aloria to be Christian; and recognizing the beneficial effect of Christianity on the guidance of laws dealing with human mercy; hereby propose to make the following changes to Alorian legislation. FIRST, that the State will recognize Christianity as the one and only State religion; comprising the vast majority of its people and inhabitants; SECOND, that the State will encourage the visits of foreign missionaries, emissaries or other religiously-affiliated delegates; THIRD, that the State will require and enforce the education of children in the matters of religion and theology, so that they might be properly shaped to live as good Christians; FOURTH, that the State will not interfere with the operations of the Church; comprising no taxation on religious institutions, no naming to or creation of religious offices, and removing any restrictions on advertisement of religion. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning the visitation of foreign missionaries.
Old value:: The government requires foreign missionaries to register with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Current: The government has no policy concerning the visitation of foreign missionaries.
Proposed: Foreign missionaries are welcomed and encouraged by the government.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change
Taxation of religious institutions.
Old value:: Religious taxation policy is left to the local governments.
Current: No religions are taxed.
Proposed: Recognized religions are not taxed.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning religions.
Old value:: There is no government policy concerning a state religion.
Current: There is an official state religion, but membership is completely voluntary.
Proposed: There is an official state religion, but membership is completely voluntary.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The governments stance on religious schools.
Old value:: Any religion may set up a school, with no regulations.
Current: Religious schools are allowed, but are strictly regulated. Only recognised religions may set up religious schools.
Proposed: All schools are required to be religious in nature.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy with respect to prayer in schools.
Old value:: The government leaves this decision up to the schools themselves.
Current: Teacher-led prayers in schools are forbidden.
Proposed: Teacher-led prayers in schools are encouraged.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change Remuneration of ministers of religion.
Old value:: The remuneration of ministers of religion shall be left up to the local governments.
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 salaries and pensions of ministers of religion shall be borne by the state and regulated by the law.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:34:53, March 02, 2006 CET | From | Social Reform Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | Absolutely not. A secular Aloria is a strong Aloria. |
| Date | 03:45:27, March 02, 2006 CET | From | Monarchist Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | A secular Aloria has no good moral or spiritual guidance. Religion stays mainly the same way it always has for a reason- it is the best code for people to live by. |
| Date | 04:07:54, March 02, 2006 CET | From | Social Reform Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | Morals are not definate for a group of people. You cannot force your christian morality onto non-christians -- not while the Social Reform Party is around. |
| Date | 05:45:41, March 02, 2006 CET | From | Capitalism Now! Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | The Capitalism Now! Party refuses to have Christianity forced upon them. We just refuse religion all together, we must keep Aloria a secular nation. |
| Date | 14:14:23, March 02, 2006 CET | From |  Aloria Green Socialist Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | It is not the government's place to involve itself in religious issues. |
| Date | 14:19:01, March 02, 2006 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | Not a chance in hell. |
| Date | 18:27:34, March 02, 2006 CET | From | Independent Capitalist Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | Forced religion is as bad as forced secularism. The ICP will fight to keep the libertarian options in place. |
| Date | 02:02:59, March 03, 2006 CET | From | Independent Capitalist Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | You will find that the MP stands alone. Just like the old MP (Memorare Party). |
| Date | 15:29:32, March 03, 2006 CET | From | Capitalism Now! Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | Ah yes, because everyone likes the ICP, don't they? |
| Date | 19:21:13, March 03, 2006 CET | From | Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the Religious Reform Act |
| Message | This is terrible, we are completely opposed. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 0 | |||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 600 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: By default the head of government is the ultimate authority within a national government. In general terms, heads of government are expected to consult with cabinet colleagues (including those from other parties) before making significant decisions but they remain responsible for government action. |
| Random quote: "Those who are responsible for the national security must be the sole judges of what the national security requires. It would be obviously undesirable that such matters should be made the subject of evidence in a court of law or otherwise discussed in public." - Unattributed member of the the House of Lords on the removal of trade union rights |