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 advertising rules
Details
Submitted by[?]: Hobrazian Peoples 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: November 2224
Description[?]:
| Those interested in religion should by themselves search for their believes and therefore go directly to those involved and get information. It should also be able to arrange home teaching by religious movements. It should not be allowed for groups or individuals anywhere in our country to preach religion to those not interested in such things. Noone should attempt to to force religious perspectives on anyone else without their consent. Thus this ammendment. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards evangelism and religious advertising.
Old value:: Religious organizations are not permitted to actively promote themselves or advertise, however evangelism is permitted by individuals.
Current: Religions are permitted to freely promote and advertise themselves.
Proposed: Religions are not permitted to promote themselves or advertise in any manner whatsoever.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 08:41:01, May 05, 2006 CET | From |  National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the Religious advertising rules |
| Message | Why? We can understand regulating advertisement (which we are against), but why evangelism too? You might as well outright banning if you want to be this radical. |
| Date | 09:10:17, May 05, 2006 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Religious advertising rules |
| Message | What's so radical about wanting to stop evangelism? Evangelism is the attempt to spread the word of god onto those who do not believe so why should they be allowed to preach to those who have no interest? That point made however, though we are against evangelism, we do understand that it is a major part of the teaching of the Christian religion "Matt 28:18-20; Mark 16:15; Luke 24:46-48; Acts 1:8." and as such should be allowed but with distinct limitations on times and places. Should the unconverted wish to hear such things they would know when and where to go without the requirement of going to the church or pastor as either can be uncomfortable for those who are merely considering their positions. |
| Date | 03:01:27, May 06, 2006 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the Religious advertising rules |
| Message | "Should the unconverted wish to hear such things they would know when and where to go without the requirement of going to the church or pastor as either can be uncomfortable for those who are merely considering their positions." Don't be silly. The hallmark of a civilized society the ability for anyone to voice their opinions. If I don't like hip hop, should I suggest that it shouldn't be played in public? One cannot go through life without hearing things they don't like, and if they do then they have probably missed some of its finer points. Hearing dissenting opinions to many just stregthens their own beliefs. To those that convert, then they found something that works for them. Surely people are rational enough to decide for themselves what information is pertinent to them. If not, screw politics and let's set up an authoritarian police state. |
| Date | 12:54:40, May 06, 2006 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Religious advertising rules |
| Message | What's silly? We were merely making the point that to those who may be considering coverting or may just be interested in the religion may feel uncomfortable visiting a place of worship that, currently, is not a part of their belief structure. We would also point out that if the entire response made by the WSS!P is taken in context then we support the point that people *can* still evangelise and that people *would* still hear those preaching their beliefs. All we said was that there should be limitations on the time and place not that they should not do it. We limit other areas, what difference this? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 107 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 255 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 38 |
| Random fact: "Nation raiding" or a malevolent coordinated effort by a single user or group of users to interrupt the gameplay, significantly alter the culture or direction of a nation is strictly prohibited. Players interacting in nation raiding will be sanctioned. |
| Random quote: "We must show that liberty is not merely one particular value but that it is the source and condition of most moral values. What a free society offers to the individual is much more than what he would be able to do if only he were free. We can therefore not fully appreciate the value of freedom until we know how a society of free men as a whole differs from one in which unfreedom prevails." - Friedrich August Hayek |