NationStates Jolt Archive

NOTING the United Nation's interest in promoting civil and political rights, and

ALARMED by the encroaching anti-religious stnaces of governments,

WE PROPOSE this Resolution in the name of Freedom of Religion, in order to grant citizens of member nations to the NationStates United Nations the right to acknowledge their supreme being.

I - TERMINOLOGY:
A. Item
"Item" shall be defined as any physical emblem, document, image, recording, relic or structure designed to symbolize, describe or explain a diety, or any physical emblem, document, image, recording, relic or structure designed to carry out any ritual or ceremony that is an integral or periphial part of celebrating, worshipping, or pacifying that diety.
B. Diety
"Diety" shall be defined as a god, goddess, or any number of gods, angels, spirits, demons, or other supreme being that is worshipped.

II - Law
This Resoultion:
A - MANDATES that governments allow their citizens, at the leisure of the citizen in question, to pray, communicate with or otherwise recognize through any or all Items of choice, their Diety without any restriction.
B - STRONGLY URGES governments to allow for their individual empolyees at all levels to acknowledge their diety on government property with their Items.

we would like to point out to Sidestreamer that there is already, in the current resolutions (UBR i think, someone will point in the right direction) that there is already a Right of Freedom of Religion

And so Komokom spoke " See here (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7029620&postcount=20), please ". And it was Goode.

Well, good enough, I hope, heh.

And so Komokom spoke " See here (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7029620&postcount=20), please ". And it was Goode.

Well, good enough, I hope, heh.
thanks, i knew it was in there somewhere

I believe thats an Ecumenical matter! :D

Superfluous, unnecessary.

"STRONGLY URGES governments to allow for their individual empolyees at all levels to acknowledge their diety on government property with their Items."

Also violates separation of religion and state, and is thus a bad thing(tm).

Just thought I'd point out that if you insist on talking about freedom of religion, it might be a good idea if you spelt deity correctly.

WE PROPOSE this Resolution in the name of Freedom of Religion, in order to grant citizens of member nations to the NationStates United Nations the right to acknowledge their supreme being.
What about non deitic religions (such as Buddhism or Taoism) ?

A - MANDATES that governments allow their citizens, at the leisure of the citizen in question, to pray, communicate with or otherwise recognize through any or all Items of choice, their Diety without any restriction.

What about if there religion prevents them from doing something that is a neccessity, or forces them to do something illegal. Such as going around nude or sacrificing children or raping virgins.

I agree with Cobdenia - whilst it would be nice to have guaranteed freedoms like this, you're not allowing for practical or human rights-based restrictions. Also, I tend to feel that we shouldn't discriminate between types of idea, so if we're to allow symbols of religious ideas, we should allow symbols of any ideas - political, scientific, whatever.

Yeah, I'm all for people having the right to acknowledge their supreme being, but I feel it's already covered by the Declaration of Human Rights. Any UN Member government that oppresses the people of a particular religion are doing so illegally.

And so Komokom spoke " See here (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7029620&postcount=20), please ". And it was Goode.

Well, good enough, I hope, heh.

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.


The language is not strong enough. It says the UN "supports" and "promotes a greater understanding of all religions and promotes more tolerance of differences of religion."

It does not MANDATE that governments cannot interfere with religious worship.

I will later on amend accordingly, by next week.

He stands before the crowd, resplendent in ceremonial regalia. He is Raijin Dekker, ranking religious, political, and military leader of Krioval. Silence deepens in anticipation of his words.

"According to the United Nations, strangely enough, religious freedom already exists by way of the Universal Bill of Rights, which I introduce as 'exhibit A' for your perusal." He throws down, with considerable force, the text in question, which reads:

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.

He looks critically at some of the more vocal 'religious' members of the United Nations, disdain obvious. "It has been done already. People may choose whatever religion they would like, or none, for that matter. And," he pauses for emphasis, "I find that access to all choices is the only way to allow one to truly experience faith. Legislating recognition of a specific deity is counterproductive. I submit that this matter is already resolved, and therefore move for adjournment so that I can deal with real issues, like trade and diplomacy. Good day."

This is quite obviously not a religious freedom proposal. This is a proposal to attempt to force governments to place religious symbols on publicly owned property. Now of course, there is some variance here. The right to have an unobtrusive religious symbol (a cross, a crescent, or other religious symbols) at your desk should be protected. The right to have a statue listing edicts from your holy book on the courthouse lawn should not be protected.

I'll wait till I see a second draft put on here before I make any detailed decision on this proposal, but my government has directed me to express misgivings regarding the first draft.

Yeah, I'm all for people having the right to acknowledge their supreme being, but I feel it's already covered by the Declaration of Human Rights. Any UN Member government that oppresses the people of a particular religion are doing so illegally.




"According to the United Nations, strangely enough, religious freedom already exists by way of the Universal Bill of Rights, which I introduce as 'exhibit A' for your perusal."

Declaration of Human Rights, Universal Bill of Rights, it's all the same, right? :p The important thing is, it's covered already, Sidestreamer.