Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: March 5461
Next month in: 01:18:18
Server time: 02:41:41, March 29, 2024 CET
Currently online (0): 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: Condemn the Dundorf Embargo (2214)

Details

Submitted by[?]: Deltarian Nationalist 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: March 2217

Description[?]:

The great nation of the Republic of Hobrazia should take a stand for fellow nations in our continent:

http://80.237.164.51/particracy/main/viewtreaty.php?treatyid=210

While we recognise that it is the inherent right of every nation to choose their trading partners this organisation is aimed at changing the national laws of Dundorf through a co-ordinated embargo aimed at damaging a fellow socialist nation.

Dundorf has the right to make any internal laws it sees fit, and nowhere has removed the population's right to vote them out of office if the laws of Dundorf are unpopular. The Dundorf government has the mandate to legislate as they see fit.

This embargo has not been sanctioned by the united countries.

We call on all signatory nations to the above agreement to reconsider their positions and express our solidarity with Dundorf.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date05:02:31, April 17, 2006 CET
FromNational Imperial Hobrazian Front
ToDebating the Condemn the Dundorf Embargo (2214)
MessageWe respect the rights of the signatory nations in their foreign policy endeavors. While we sympathize with our socialist brethren, the DDR's ban on religion is a gross violation of human rights.

Date13:26:17, April 17, 2006 CET
FromWe Say So! Party
ToDebating the Condemn the Dundorf Embargo (2214)
MessageHaving decided to look into the matter, we feel that the description of what happens to those with religious connotations within the DDR are completely without merit. Whilst outward signs of religion are indeed illegal the laws within the DDR do not ban the ability of the people to believe in one supernatural being or other privately.

Quote from discussion 2184 "Resolution: Freedom from Religion":

lokistorm Party;

"Agreed, We are not restricting their rights to believe in it, merely we are restricting them from publicly worshipping that religion."

This one statement calls into question the statement within the above mentioned treaty of:

"These people face imprisonment, harassment and other forms of persecution from the hands of the Dundorf government."

We have found no evidence that these events as described above have, do, or will occur and until such evidence is presented we would not recommend to this Chamber that we should move into support of the treaty. However, at the same time, we should request that a full investigation into DDR religious laws be allowed to guarantee that these breaches in rights are not occuring. Should it be found that no such endeavours (as quoted above) are occuring within the DDR, then we should stand with them as it is their choice as to what their internal laws are.

Date18:52:25, April 17, 2006 CET
FromNational Imperial Hobrazian Front
ToDebating the Condemn the Dundorf Embargo (2214)
Message"We have found no evidence that these events as described above have, do, or will occur and until such evidence is presented we would not recommend to this Chamber that we should move into support of the treaty" Nobody said anything about ratifying the embargo. CTPoH is proposing that we condemn it.

Regardless, the DDR does not allow organized religion. While their legislation mentions nothing about private worship, it does not allow for congregations to convene. Whether or not there have been imprisonment of adherents is not really the issue; Dundorf is depriving their citizens of a very basic civil right.

"The great nation of the Republic of Hobrazia should take a stand for fellow nations in our continent." There are two nations on our continent that have ratified the treaty- both which border us. Do we stand for Dundorf, Luthori, or Malivia?

Date19:02:47, April 17, 2006 CET
FromWe Say So! Party
ToDebating the Condemn the Dundorf Embargo (2214)
Message"Nobody said anything about ratifying the embargo. CTPoH is proposing that we condemn it." - Accepted, however the full quote was:
"However, at the same time, we should request that a full investigation into DDR religious laws be allowed to guarantee that these breaches in rights are not occuring. Should it be found that no such endeavours (as quoted above) are occuring within the DDR, then we should stand with them as it is their choice as to what their internal laws are." - Which adds in the proposal covered by this legislation brought to discussion by the CTPoH.

"Regardless, the DDR does not allow organized religion. While their legislation mentions nothing about private worship, it does not allow for congregations to convene. Whether or not there have been imprisonment of adherents is not really the issue; Dundorf is depriving their citizens of a very basic civil right." - We disagree, if only on the prinicple that the allowance to convene in congregations is a civil right. Though we would not consider introducing such a thing here it must be taken into acocunt the differences between Countries. The right to convene in congregations is one that is given to people by Government. The laws in the DDR do not allow this, as is their want, and there is no part of religion that requires large congregations. Should the people be banned from practicing their religion in private this becomes a major civil rights issue, however there is no such legislation implemented in the DDR that we have found and as such is a political issue, not civil and certainly not international.

"There are two nations on our continent that have ratified the treaty- both which border us. Do we stand for Dundorf, Luthori, or Malivia?" - We stand for Hobrazia and should only become embroiled in this situation should it be a problem for Hobrazia or if we are asked to become involved by another Country.

Date22:38:25, April 17, 2006 CET
FromNational Imperial Hobrazian Front
ToDebating the Condemn the Dundorf Embargo (2214)
Message"We stand for Hobrazia and should only become embroiled in this situation should it be a problem for Hobrazia or if we are asked to become involved by another Country." Agreed wholeheartedly. I was bringing to attention flaws in the CTPoH's reasonings for this bill. If we mess around too much in these international politics that don't affect us, nothing good can come of it.

"The right to convene in congregations is one that is given to people by Government." I could use the the religious argument that this right is granted by God and not the government, but that would fall on deaf ears. What WSS! has missed out on is that there is no distinction amongst adherents between public and private life. Religion is not a weekend hobby (well to some it may be); it is a way of viewing human interactions with the divine. To practice a religion in private and practice none in public is silly. If a Jew leaves his or her home, does he or she cease to be a Jew? Also ignored is the function that the community serves in the role of religion, id est, it provides a support system for the members of that religious community.

Regardless, this discussion has digressed beyond what I had intended it to. All theo-political debate aside, this bill could only lead to poor consequences.

Date13:58:52, April 18, 2006 CET
FromDeltarian Nationalist Party
ToDebating the Condemn the Dundorf Embargo (2214)
MessageI must admit I only became aware of the embargo recently but feel that stopping trade would be worse for the population of Dundorf than a ban on congregational worship. We should not sit back and watch nations bully Dundorf to change internal politics. Would it not be better to open diplomatic chanels with Dundorf and discuss possible changes that would please the international community?

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
       

Total Seats: 355

no
 

Total Seats: 32

abstain
 

Total Seats: 13


Random fact: Real life-life nationalities, cultures or ethnicities should not be referenced in Particracy (eg. "German").

Random quote: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." - Mark Twain

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 52