NationStates Jolt Archive

I have submitted a very important proposal called "Religion Budget Adjustment." This proposal's voting ends Wednesday, May 18. All Delegates please approve my proposal. It will help moral decency greatly and make the world a better place.

It's generally appriciated if you post a copy in the forums.
Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Jonesawa

Description: I. Religion and Spirituality is an important aspect of a
nation's moral decency. Yet, many nations aren't taking
it seriously. It should be funded more than what it is.

II. To correct the problem, all new nations admitted to
the UN should have a 5% of their budget supporting it.
To look at the budget, nseconomy.thirdgeek.com can be
used.

III. All current UN members should be allowed a very
generous amount time to adjust this.

We in Wegason do not have a religious and spirituality department, we do not fund special interest groups. If religion is to thrive in our secular state it has to survive on its own without government funding. I will not support this proposal.

Forcing nations to fund religious organizations would be a violation of any Seperation clauses they may have.

:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:
Non-constructive.

Religion has been the greatest cause of warfare the world has ever seen. Forcing Government funding of old fashioned and outdated concepts can only lead to nation states getting involved into inter-denominational struggles, causing bigger and bloodier "Holy Wars"

If not religion then its something else, do not blame religion for violence.

To look at the budget, nseconomy.thirdgeek.com can be used.This line must be removed. References to real-world items, even ones that describe NationStates-related sites, are illegal.
II. To correct the problem, all new nations admitted
III. All current UN members should be allowed a very generous amount time to adjust this.Selective enforcement is equivalent to making it optional, and is therefore illegal.
should have a 5% of their budget supporting it.People somehow fail to see how a tiny percentage can be suh a HUGE amount of money. Maybe .005% gov't support for a specific program is reasonable, but a tithe of 5% is rougly equivalent to many nations' entire agriculture or education budgets. It's just a silly amount to throw out there. Oh, and setting specific effects is considered game mechanics, and therefore illegal.

Which leaves on the first section, " I. Religion and Spirituality is an important aspect of a nation's moral decency. Yet, many nations aren't taking it seriously. It should be funded more than what it is."

We just plain disagree with this one. Frisbeeteria has had a zero percent Religion score (according to ThirdGeek) since its founding, and it seems to be doing just fine. No thanks.

If not religion then its something else, do not blame religion for violence

I blame religion for religious violence

If not religion then its something else, do not blame religion for violence

I blame religion for religious violence
Blame men who use religion in the name of violence, do not blame religion.

Blame men who use religion in the name of violence, do not blame religion.

And forcing governments to fund religion would allow more people to use religion as a reason for war.

Argue religion elsewhere. This forum is for arguing about proposals.

Don't worry, Fris. I just bought it back on topic, namely forcing governments to fund religion

Blame men who use religion in the name of violence, do not blame religion.

And forcing governments to fund religion would allow more people to use religion as a reason for war.
What evidence do you have for that? (devils advocate)

One possibility:
1. Government funds religion
2. Religion becomes more and more popular
3. Theocratic Government elected
4. Theocratic Government goes to war with another theocratic government

Or maybe
1. Government A funds religion A
2. Government B funds religion B
3. Government A thinks that people who follows religion B is worthy of death
4. Government A invades country B

Or indeed
1. Government funds minority religion
2. Majority religions followers get uppity
3. Majority launch coup

or perhaps
1. Government funds religion
2. Majority Atheist population gets irritated by the waste of funds
3. Coup

One possibility:
1. Government funds religion
2. Religion becomes more and more popular
3. Theocratic Government elected
4. Theocratic Government goes to war with another theocratic government

Both 3 and 4 are speculative at best.

Or maybe
1. Government A funds religion A
2. Government B funds religion B
3. Government A thinks that people who follows religion B is worthy of death
4. Government A invades country B

Take 1 and 2 out of it, that already happens, funding or no.

Or indeed
1. Government funds minority religion
2. Majority religions followers get uppity
3. Majority launch coup

More wild speculation.

or perhaps
1. Government funds religion
2. Majority Atheist population gets irritated by the waste of funds
3. Coup

Depends on the seperation clauses, and 3 is more speculation. And all the times I use that word I mean its as credible as a fairy tale.

Non-constructive.

Neither is a resolution that forces secular governments to fund religion.

Neither is a resolution that forces secular governments to fund religion.

Neither is a non-UN member getting involved in UN affairs (referring to ElectronX)

Neither is a resolution that forces secular governments to fund religion.
Tu quoque.

Neither is a resolution that forces secular governments to fund religion.

Neither is a non-UN member getting involved in UN affairs (referring to ElectronX)
No rule against it, I am a UN member FYI.

Not according to your web page...

United Nations Activity

Endorsements Received: None.

I think you may need to look harder.

Hmmm...
The UN symbol wasn't there when I checked. Did you only join today, or just answer the email?

Hmmm...
The UN symbol wasn't there when I checked. Did you only join today, or just answer the email?
I joined a week ago.

Waterana won't support this.

Religions in our secular atheist nation fund themselves. We don't and won't give them taxpayers money. On the contrary, thanks to an issue, religious entities are taxed and treated like any other money making business. I can't see why we should take money away from social welfare, education and health that benefit the majority of citizens and give it to religions, especially as only 32% of our people are involved with them.

Oh. Sorry about that electronX.
For some reason when I looked at your page it wasn't there...

Oh. Sorry about that electronX.
For some reason when I looked at your page it wasn't there...
poor CGI coding maybe?

Tu quoque.

Vescere bracis meis. :D

Can anyone think of a single benefit this proposal would have besides wasting the money of secular governments?

Neither is a non-UN member getting involved in UN affairs
* MJ Donovan, former Frisbeeterian UN Ambassador, picks up a gallery microphone *"I am a citizen of a non-UN state who constantly gets involved in UN affairs. Frisbeeteria handed over her UN role to the nation of Gnomewatchers, and they requested my particular expertise. Being retired, I was delighted to once again have the opportunity to serve our brother nation. Nonetheless, I have not nor will not give up my Frisbeeterian citizenship.

Do not be quick to condemn unless or until you have all the facts."

[OOC] This is an open forum. Anyone can post and/or argue here.

You realize that by even making this proposal you're saying that the only budget should be religion right? There are so many different religions and denominations, not to mention cults people can start, that by the time everyone demanded govermental support, there would be no more money for education, welfare, and the military, just to name a few which are all universal needs.

Exactly. Not to mention the fact that a LOT of atheist, agnostic, and just plain secular nations aren't going to want to waste their money.

I'm not sure but isn't it illegal? Forcing all nations to have 5% religion budgets might be 'Game Mechanics', as well as the concept illegalises secular government, which is also illegla.

I'm not sure but isn't it illegal?
I'm pretty darn sure I already said it was (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8882967&postcount=9).

Oh, sorry, I didn't notice that post first time around...

I have submitted a very important proposal called "Religion Budget Adjustment." This proposal's voting ends Wednesday, May 18. All Delegates please approve my proposal. It will help moral decency greatly and make the world a better place.

The Constitutional Republic of Tekania is a libertarian Republic. It is not the purpose of the General Government to enforce, or re-enforce particular religious beliefs. We allow the people to make such determinations themselves.

Forced budgeting to religious organizations would be a violation of Principle 1, Article I, of our Federal Constitution.

Should such be enacted, this Republic would be forced to resign from the UN, in order to protect the general populous from tyrany.

Imperial Ashatar agrees with the republic of Tekania, as well as others in this debate. This proposal would create an unnecessary burden on public monies, as well as breaking the articles of the Acts of Foundation concerning the seperation of religion and the state. In addition, such a ruling would have economic consequences above and beyond any affect on the ability of government to effectively rule.

Non-constructive.
may not be constructive, but it is how we responded too. really, we have to play this
http://img112.echo.cx/img112/1306/natsovcard7yg.jpg
in that this is more a national thing, not UN worthy.

I have submitted a very important proposal called "Religion Budget Adjustment." This proposal's voting ends Wednesday, May 18. All Delegates please approve my proposal. It will help moral decency greatly and make the world a better place.

"Religion is a matter between every man and his maker, in which no other, and far less the government, has a right to intervene." - Thomas Jefferson

Pojonias stance on religion is simple - it doesn't have a stance on religion. The people practice it however they feel like, and they raise their own damn money if they're going to try to convert others. Religion is essentially invisible to the government, and that works just fine for us.

Moral decency rarely makes the world a better place, in my opinion. Especially since a moral is defined by the person who creates it, not the entirety of the populace.

Religion is the choice of our citizen and our government can not and will not be involved by providing funding.

It would clearly step over our rule of separation of church and state.

Minister to the UN
Henry Peabody

Vastiva taxes religious organizations, and will continue to do so.

The idea of State funds going to a religion is... laughable. We invest in things which give suitable return on our capital, not throw money out the window.

It has been the experience of the People of the Free Lands of Draconomia that we can more efficiently spend our money than the government can. Therefore, we will oppose this in favor of lower taxes and keeping our individual right to choose a particular religion or no religion at all in tact.

The Government of Amnalos does not give any money to religious enterprises. They are, however, tax exempt so long as they remain non-profit and largely charitable organizations. I would vote NO to this proposal.

In Darkumbria, we practice a seperation between chruch and state, and that will remain.

I have submitted a very important proposal called "Religion Budget Adjustment." This proposal's voting ends Wednesday, May 18. All Delegates please approve my proposal. It will help moral decency greatly and make the world a better place.


Where is this vote taking place? I have searched for the thread where it is taking place, but can find nothing about it.

Thanks

Bahgum is a none religious/spiritual/whateveryoucallit country and will steadfastly refuse any effort to assign even a fraction of an eckythump to such none capitalist frivolities.

The Empire of The Pheonix Legion provides NO funding for religions. The only acceptable view in MY Empire is MY view. When you live in my Empire, you bow to the will of me, Dagoth Agahnim, if you expect to survive. This should be obvious simply due to the fact that we refer to our citizens as "human resources."

Ok guys, there's no chance of this passing anyway, so we can back off now. :D

Ok guys, there's no chance of this passing anyway, so we can back off now. :D


Wohooo... /does the dance of joy