NationStates Jolt Archive

We in the UN are a progressive sort, but there is one final taboo we are yet to break down. Many people labelled as "wackos" or "psychos" are done so because of their religious beliefs which are obscure or frowned upon by society. I propose that we accept these people into the folds of society oce more, by allowing them to freely declare their religion without fear of persecution or humiliation. I therefore propose the Recognition of Obscure Religions Act (the ROOR Act), as follows;
Article 1
Jedi knights, Flanders Followers', Homer's Homies,Satanists, Secularists, Humanists,Elvis Worshippers, Republicans, Democrats, Agnostics and Swing Voters are all officially recognised as religions
Article 2
Mocking, intimidation or any other form of abuse of followers of the above religions shall be outlawed
Article 3
Holidays recognised by these religions shall also be recognised by the UN
Article 4
The above religions can be freely practised in all nations within the confines of the law, eg murders for human sacrifices are not allowed
Article 5
All other rights which apply to so-called "major" religions also apply to religions affected by this act. Also, the religions affected by this act must be, although unusual, considered the equals of the "major religions".

So far, I only have 2 backers, Rusienne my regional delegate and WZ Forums.
However, I feel this is a very important Act to pass- for too long, Elvis impersonators have been mocked. Rise up and make a difference!
I thankyouverymuch.
Gary has left the building!

We in the UN are a progressive sort, but there is one final taboo we are yet to break down. Many people labelled as "wackos" or "psychos" are done so because of their religious beliefs which are obscure or frowned upon by society. I propose that we accept these people into the folds of society oce more, by allowing them to freely declare their religion without fear of persecution or humiliation. I therefore propose the Recognition of Obscure Religions Act (the ROOR Act), as follows;

Already covered by the Universal Bill of Rights. It's point #1.

Article 1
Jedi knights, Flanders Followers', Homer's Homies,Satanists, Secularists, Humanists,Elvis Worshippers, Republicans, Democrats, Agnostics and Swing Voters are all officially recognised as religions

Of those, only two are actually sets of beliefs. The rest are either fanatics gone wrong, political or social viewpoints, or not even close to a religion. I already see this needs heavy revision to include more than just a couple sets of beliefs.

Article 2
Mocking, intimidation or any other form of abuse of followers of the above religions shall be outlawed

Freedom of speech includes mocking and intimidation.

Article 3
Holidays recognised by these religions shall also be recognised by the UN

Um, no. I only celebrate holidays recognized by my nation. Which are all documented in my FAQ.

Article 4
The above religions can be freely practised in all nations within the confines of the law, eg murders for human sacrifices are not allowed

Yay! I can make a law stating all members of those religions must commit suicide! Yay!

Article 5
All other rights which apply to so-called "major" religions also apply to religions affected by this act. Also, the religions affected by this act must be, although unusual, considered the equals of the "major religions".

Why?

So far, I only have 2 backers, Rusienne my regional delegate and WZ Forums.
However, I feel this is a very important Act to pass- for too long, Elvis impersonators have been mocked. Rise up and make a difference!
I thankyouverymuch.
Gary has left the building!

They have been mocked for a reason.

This I find to be not worth the UN's time.

this is exactly what I'm getting at- these people may be viewed as strange, but most importantly THOSE ARE THEIR BELIEFS, however right or wrong they may be. The first point is reinforcing the Bill Of Rights and backing it up, no bad thing at all. The second article, although not clear, refers to extreme intimidation and derisory remarks made about certain people's religions. However, I do take on board your point and agree that mocking should be removed. I don't want to restrict free speech as much as the next person.
The third article means that nations can officially recognise their holidays, not that all countries must adopt them, only perhaps recognise them if asked. Again, bad wording on my part but i'll fix it.
Article 4, you know what I mean. you could never pass a law making people commit suicide anyway, it breaches many of the UN's passed rules. You should know that, having picked over my proposal with a fine toothcomb you must have dons so to other ones.
Article 5- Because the religions affected by this act will (obviously) become equal religions, and it was a way of tying up loose ends in case i missed any rights out (which i probably did).
The end bit was my attempt at a lighthearted but meaningful joke, no need to shoot it down in a burst of flames. Anyone would think you were bitter about life. Relaaaxxx,mon!
Thankyou for your comments anyhoo.

Your pal,
Gary

this is exactly what I'm getting at- these people may be viewed as strange, but most importantly THOSE ARE THEIR BELIEFS, however right or wrong they may be. The first point is reinforcing the Bill Of Rights and backing it up, no bad thing at all.

Not all of those you listed are religious beliefs, though. If you include Republicans, you have to include scientists and hundreds of others.

The second article, although not clear, refers to extreme intimidation and derisory remarks made about certain people's religions. However, I do take on board your point and agree that mocking should be removed. I don't want to restrict free speech as much as the next person.

No worries.

The third article means that nations can officially recognise their holidays, not that all countries must adopt them, only perhaps recognise them if asked. Again, bad wording on my part but i'll fix it.

Thanks. As worded, it was a forced recognition.

Article 4, you know what I mean. you could never pass a law making people commit suicide anyway, it breaches many of the UN's passed rules. You should know that, having picked over my proposal with a fine toothcomb you must have dons so to other ones.

I have a loophole the UN didn't foresee. But I'd never pass such laws anyway. It was just an extreme example you have to watch out for.

Article 5- Because the religions affected by this act will (obviously) become equal religions, and it was a way of tying up loose ends in case i missed any rights out (which i probably did).

Ah.

The end bit is called irony, dear. You may have heard of it? No? Pity.
Thankyou for your comments anyhoo.

Your pal,
Gary

I'm sometimes a literalist. It's a tendency I try to control.

You're welcome.

Why should nations give rights to Jedis which they don't grant other major religions? _Myopia_'s government doesn't protect religions from criticism anymore than we protect any other organisations - because as far as the government is concerned religious ideas (be they Hindu, Christian, Jedi or athiest) are just ideas, same as scientific theories, political views or philosophical ponderings. We don't believe it is the place of government to judge one type of idea as more important than another.

All that should be done is to ensure that minor religions are not discriminated against on grounds of number of followers - i.e. all you need to include is the principle contained in Article 5.

well, i didn't mean for it to sound that way. Someone could submit a proposal extending the same to other religions, or I could try to remove that part either a) at the 2nd attempt if this one fails or b) once it's passed.
I myself am an atheist, but would still like to extends welcomes and rights to religions. I am for the separation of church and state, support abortion and euthanasia and back civil unions if notgay marriages (just to reiterate my point, tought of course some religious people may share my beliefs it is very unlikely).
Sorry again, but keep pointing these things out, that way it has more chance of passing and i can make it watertight.
Thanks again!

I must give you credit DLE. You sure do know how to knock down a proposal.lol

As the Chumbawumba song "Tubthumping" goes, "I get knocked out, but i get up again, you never gonna keep me down".
This proposal ain't stopped yet, great agnostica. In fact (arranges evil voice)
IT'S ONLY JUST BEGUN...

Last time I checked "secularists", "humanists", "satanists", and "agnostics" were pretty well protected in the UN...in fact people who want to 'become closer' to other species are respected in the UN...I only think it seems "major" religions ever get under attack.
Also I find it funny to imagine a government agency that looks over "obscure" or "strange" religions...I'd imagine the religions would feel slightly shafted by such titles...funny thing is though is Mr. Gary is that if you slightly changed this resolution (esp. taking out Republicans...that'd be the end of any resolution in the UN) it would pass...

I mean the proposal needs help not the thread...no offense to anyone in the thread.

I don't really se the point of this proposal. I like the idea of getting obscure relgiioons recognized. But, you don't really mention any real relgions. Maybe if this was a tad more serious, and included real religions.

I also see no way to implememt or enforce anything that is said in this proposal.

You can submit proposals extended another proposal, but I could always be wrong about that.

If you rewrotr this, included real religions, was more clear in the intent, and included ways to implement and enforce this then it might have more of a chance.

Article 1
Jedi knights, Flanders Followers', Homer's Homies,Satanists, Secularists, Humanists,Elvis Worshippers, Republicans, Democrats, Agnostics and Swing Voters are all officially recognised as religions
Let's see here...
Jedi Knights? Well, I put that down in the last census, so don't really have cause to complain.
Flanders Followers' - never heard of them
Homer's Homies - ditto
Satanists - well, if the (RL) Royal Navy recognises it, who am I to say no?
Secularists - Not a religion. A belief system, but not a religion.
Humanists - ditto. It is entirely possible to be both religious and a humanist
Elvis worshippers - deserve anything they get.
Republicans, Democrats - This makes it illegal, as it refers to political parties that only exist within the RL United States.
Swing Voters - what?
Agnostics - agnosticism is the state when one does not know whether there is a god, whether religion is true or not. It is not a religion in and of itself.

We in the UN are a progressive sort, but there is one final taboo we are yet to break down. Many people labelled as "wackos" or "psychos" are done so because of their religious beliefs which are obscure or frowned upon by society. I propose that we accept these people into the folds of society oce more, by allowing them to freely declare their religion without fear of persecution or humiliation. I therefore propose the Recognition of Obscure Religions Act (the ROOR Act), as follows;
Article 1
Jedi knights, Flanders Followers', Homer's Homies,Satanists, Secularists, Humanists,Elvis Worshippers, Republicans, Democrats, Agnostics and Swing Voters are all officially recognised as religions
Article 2
Mocking, intimidation or any other form of abuse of followers of the above religions shall be outlawed
Article 3
Holidays recognised by these religions shall also be recognised by the UN
Article 4
The above religions can be freely practised in all nations within the confines of the law, eg murders for human sacrifices are not allowed
Article 5
All other rights which apply to so-called "major" religions also apply to religions affected by this act. Also, the religions affected by this act must be, although unusual, considered the equals of the "major religions".

So far, I only have 2 backers, Rusienne my regional delegate and WZ Forums.
However, I feel this is a very important Act to pass- for too long, Elvis impersonators have been mocked. Rise up and make a difference!
I thankyouverymuch.
Gary has left the building!

I'm kinda glad Gary has left the building, because this proposal isn't very well thought out. The biggest problem I have with the proposal is the severe restriction you've placed on freedom of speech. My people have the right to mock anybody they please, especially grown men who wear their hair in braids and carry light-sticks around. Not only that, but asking me to recognize Flanders' Followers and Homer's Homies as legitimate religions is basically asking me to recognize cartoons as anything but fictional. Not gonna happen Gary.

Negative... Affirmative.

We reject this proposal as the most recent census of our nation has shown that there are no obsecure religions (such as the ludicrous ones you have suggested) in practice in Kryozerkia. Secondly, all Protestant religions have been outlawed, so why would we allow such a legislation?

without even reading it: no.

the oppressed peoples of asshelmetta are opposed to obscure religions.

How does that sound? Since minority groups of all sort are protected in the U.N, why not initiate a day recognizing and celebrating the diversity of the religious beliefs on our beautiful planet?
Of course we will have to leave it open for all religions (listing them will exclude, well, obscure religions). This could be worded in a way that specifies that it is not intended for official state religions, or the top several majority religions in any given country, but for minority or indigenous religions (this point could be debated).
This would be very cheap since each country could choose how to honour this day, (or not honour this day) the only cost to the U.N could be some basic promotion, or maybe a ceremony at headquarters. I think this would help raise global awareness and appreciation for the worlds rich and diverse mosaic.

Sai,
Principality of Prachya

Religious Tolerance


A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Athine

Description: Whereas, Freedom of Religion does not exist in all countries in the world. Whereas, Too many wars are started and fought because of religious differences.

Whereas, There is a need for more religious tolerance on Earth. Therefore be it resolved that the United Nations support and promote a greater understanding of all religions and promote more tolerance of differences of religion.

Be it further resolved that the United Nations oppose all wars fought in the name of God and religion.

Votes For: 12297

Votes Against: 3380

Implemented: Sat Jun 21 2003


and


The Universal Bill of Rights


A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Free porcupines

Description: Recalling the many egregious infringements of human rights,

Recognizing the need to protect basic human rights,

Deploring any acts by government at the sake of human rights,

Determined to put an end to the violation of human rights,

The United Nations shall endorse what will be called the Universal Bill of Rights, the articles of which are as follows:

Article 1 -- All human beings have the right to choose worship any faith, and to change their religious beliefs at any time without punishment on the part of the state.

Article 2 -- All human beings have the right to express themselves through speech and through the media without any interference.

Article 3 -- All human beings have the right to peacefully assemble.

Article 4 -- All human beings have the right to be treated equally under the law of any member nation.

Article 5 -- All human beings must not be subjected to torture or to cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment.

Article 6 -- No human beings will be subjected to arrest or exile without an explicit list of their offenses.

Article 7 -- Any arrested person must be assumed innocent until proven guilty.

Article 8 -- A human beings family members cannot be held accountable for the crimes of their relative.

Article 9 -- Any persons who violate any of these articles shall be held accountable by the law.

Article 10 -- The Universal Bill of Rights does not override the existing Bill of Rights of United Nations members. If any of these stated rights do not exist in a member nation, they are herby protected. If any nation has rights that go beyond these universal rights, the Universal Bill of Rights will not remove those rights.

Votes For: 11169

Votes Against: 3649

Implemented: Fri Aug 8 2003


No where is the phrase "major religions" found in these two resolutions. They apply to all religions.

So why do we need a new proposal to protect what is protected already?

I had a good laugh, but as Tekania would say, should this pass the UN obviously isn't enforcing its old Resolutions well. All religions are protected under UN Law.

Just to follow up: We have recieved no response about our suggestion of starting some sort of day of respect for the worlds religous diversity. We think that our idea might help promote the ideals that the auther of this resolution was trying to support.

Sai

Just to follow up: We have recieved no response about our suggestion of starting some sort of day of respect for the worlds religous diversity. We think that our idea might help promote the ideals that the auther of this resolution was trying to support.

Sai

The problem with that is there are religions we (being the people of TilEnca) feel are bad. We are not going to say people should not practice them, and we are certainly not going to go on a crusade to wipe them out, but at the same time we are not going to pay to glorify and celebrate them, since we think that would be a tad hypocritical since we don't like them.

Utterly stupid, mostly redundant.

The words 'you do not have our support' come to mind.

Lady Desdemona of Merwell,
Senior UN representative,
The Black New World,
Delegate to The Order of The Valiant States

Okay, TilEnca I'd have to agree with you there. We are certainly not a religious government but we do like to make our people feel warm and cozy and believe that we feel their pain, and so on.

Horrifying thought..... Since the original poster of this forum, and resolution hasn't posted for a bit..... people don't think this is i my i/ resolution do they?????

(red faced)

Sai (not the author of this proposal) Boonkaew

Bob is wholeheartedly against the introduction of any new legislature that invloves religion because of the ramifications it may have on our gambling state. If measure reaches quorum, we will be forced to submit equally ridiculous religions for sumbission, the Southern Gambleites, the Texas Hold'ems, and some other strange cult related to betting on cockfighting.

Thank you,
Bob