NationStates Jolt Archive

So could you please vote on it. :) :) :) :)

the proposal is not meant to offend anyone and if it does i am sorry. :( :(






Up with Socialism. :D :fluffle: :D

I really like the proposal, except you mention your nation's name at the bottom of the proposal. In the Rules For UN Proposals [Now Binding] (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=420465) it says:

Further branding will result in the Proposal being deleted...don't list yourself

I suggest re-submitting your proposal taking out your name at the bottom of the proposal.

here's the proposal so you can look it over!! :cool:

Seperation of Church and state

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights


Strength: Strong


Proposed by: Le Tirane

Description: OBSERVES that
-A-every person has the right to their own individual beliefs and religons.

REGRETS that
-B-in some nations people are persecuted and discriminated against due to the fact their beliefs differ from the goverments.
-C-that some governments use their power to further their own religous agenda.
-D-that 60% of wars in the world are started over idealogical beliefs.

Mandates that
-1-that public political speeches have no reference to a god or higher deity/unless it is a religous party of festival/event.
-2-that no state building has a religous reference in it (no ten commandments in courthouses)unless there is a refernece for each and every other religon in the building,reflecting diversity and equality.
-3-religous partys allowed/unless they are a extremist party, like (Al Queda or Westbridge Chaple).
-4-no group prayers at political events/unless it is a religous party orevnt/festival.
-5-governments cannot pass laws, that discriminate against other minoritys or religous groups.
-6-no group prayers in public schools, that indicate a god or higher deity/personal prayer is allowed.
-7-evolution will be taught in schools to further science/though teachers may indicate that it is just a theory and anything could have happened.
-8-religous/public schools will be inspected annualy, so they are not teaching insciting hatred of certain religous groups and minoritys.
-9-no wars may be started over religous beliefs or in the name or a god or higher deity.
-10-all religous groups must recive equal funding from the goverment.
-11-no state buildings may be named after a god or higher deity/other building like churches,temples,synagouges, mosques,nun hospitals,nunnerys,monastarys or other religous buildings may be named after though)

Socialist Republic of Le Tirane

"Hold The Hands Of All People"

Approvals: 46 (Absolutely Anywhere, Eve the First, Kaize, Aldurr, Darth Mall, Kapellen, Northern Sushi, Sobusa, Sodakia, WZ Forums, Gaiah, Republic of Freedonia, Shariann, Jilliland, Aris-Connistan, Punrovia, Musicgirl, Partholan, Selat, Gateborg, United Tribe of Maddox, Elika, Pharan, UntamedFangirls, The Unending Winter, Elghinn, Ryan d, Ghost_Goth, Vanilla Cake, Luxus Mond, Blue Buddhas, Inertialization, Kevin Islands, Hakenium, Bucknerdom, Marion Oaks 2, Alfred and Garfield, Clintoned, Hypnotic Waves, Forumwalker, Of Cascadia, Funkdunk, New Javert, Mikeswill, Nelvaan, Spiritbw)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 83 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Wed Sep 14 2005

This is an outrage! Have you thought to consider nations who were founded on religion? Or nations where the only thing keeping them together is religion?

It's against the rules to attempt to ban a specific government type (in this case theocracies). Nice try.

It's against the rules to attempt to ban a specific government type (in this case theocracies). Nice try. :headbang: :headbang: :sniper: :mp5:

The UN said this was ok so there!!!! hahhahahahahah :D :D :D

Actually, there was a thread about this in moderation just recently. You can't attempt to ban specific government types. =p

edit: :sniper: :sniper: :gundge: :mp5:

The UN said this was ok so there!!!!
What UN was that? If you're referring to your ability to click the Submit button, that doesn't make it legal. There's not a little man sitting inside the server verifying the content of each proposal - one of us Mods has to periodically scour the list and delete illegal resolutions.

Like this one.

Which will be deleted, once one of us gets around to it.


~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Game Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop

Edit: Just dug this up:

Sun Sep 11 07:04:52 2005: le_tirane was sent the telegram
"UN Proposal "Seperation of Church and State" deleted. It violates the "Idealogical Bans" section of "Rules For UN Proposals" in the UN Forum (by banning Theocratic governments). Read the rules before posting any more proposals, as two more violations will see you ejected from the UN. http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=420465".

I'm unclear how ANY interpretation of this telegram could have given you the impression that your proposal was legal.

This is actually an interesting one, because it sort of does and sort of doesn't ban theocracies. Oh, and as a side note, I actually started that thread after a brainstorm hit me while reading the TG sent to me regarding this proposal (though this is actually the first time I've read it).

Regardless, even if we were to argue that it didn't ban theocracies, it is illegal for several reasons

here's the proposal so you can look it over!! :cool:

Please limit your smilies. This one here was ok, and actually well placed. Your other post was less so. Smilies generally deteriorate the quality of the post and people tend to display less respect for arguments that sit next to smilies.

Seperation of Church and state

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights


Strength: Strong


Proposed by: Le Tirane

Now, I note this category: human rights. This is important to remember as we go through this resolution as you drifted from the central theme of human rights. This proposal, as it is written, actually works as a freedom of religion proposal more than a seperation of church and state (with exception to a few clauses). Unfortunately, this also means it has questionable contest with resolution 19, even though resolution 19 is more of a statement than a resolution. (Well, poem)

Description: OBSERVES that
-A-every person has the right to their own individual beliefs and religons.

It's not an observation, it's a belief. If it was an observation, it would already be a universal right.

REGRETS that
-B-in some nations people are persecuted and discriminated against due to the fact their beliefs differ from the goverments.
-C-that some governments use their power to further their own religous agenda.
-D-that 60% of wars in the world are started over idealogical beliefs.

Stats not allowed, trends are. "that most wars" is ok. "that 60% of wars", not ok. Also, I note that this is not entirely true since we are working in the NationStates realm. Most wars within NationStates are started just because some kid was bored or invader regions wanted to set a challenge of invading region X.

Mandates that
-1-that public political speeches have no reference to a god or higher deity/unless it is a religous party of festival/event.

Kill the slash after deity. Of, I think, should be or (I think that's what you intended, otherwise it is poorly worded and doesn't give any consideration to theocracies).

-2-that no state building has a religous reference in it (no ten commandments in courthouses)unless there is a refernece for each and every other religon in the building,reflecting diversity and equality.

Fails to respect theocracies.

-3-religous partys allowed/unless they are a extremist party, like (Al Queda or Westbridge Chaple).

Real Life references, illegal.

-4-no group prayers at political events/unless it is a religous party orevnt/festival.

Agreed, though fix the grammar

-5-governments cannot pass laws, that discriminate against other minoritys or religous groups.

add "based upon religion". Otherwise you hit a duplication with discrimination accord (99)

-6-no group prayers in public schools, that indicate a god or higher deity/personal prayer is allowed.

Disagree, but I have an alternate. Something that exists in lots of cities is a main board of education that is not religious, with a few other public boards of education that are religious, and note their religion up front.

-7-evolution will be taught in schools to further science/though teachers may indicate that it is just a theory and anything could have happened.

Duplication, illegal. Resolution 103 IIRC - or 101.

-8-religous/public schools will be inspected annualy, so they are not teaching insciting hatred of certain religous groups and minoritys.

Iffy on this one. It's a good theory, but I'm really concerned about practice. I think back to the days of Aparthied in South Africa where black teachers teaching black students could get in big trouble for certain things that weren't, per se, "inciting hatred".

-9-no wars may be started over religous beliefs or in the name or a god or higher deity.

I would say that the word "solely" needs to be added. If it is religious genocide of the religion that your government practices, I think religion would be a reason, but genocide would be the greater reason. Both would exist and it can be proven that the nation took action for both reasons, but it wasn't just because of religion.

-10-all religous groups must recive equal funding from the goverment.

This one is too ugly to work with. While no major religion should be extraordinarily penalized in terms of funding, one must ask whether some small sect of a religion (say totaling 50 people) should get the same amount of money as the entire Catholic or Jewish church. Further, the loopholes around this are endless (on no, we aren't donating it to this religion, we're donating it to this religious charitable organization....that's propogating the religion.....). Also, it gives little respect to theocracy.

-11-no state buildings may be named after a god or higher deity/other building like churches,temples,synagouges, mosques,nun hospitals,nunnerys,monastarys or other religous buildings may be named after though)

Just don't try this one. It's not a good idea.

Socialist Republic of Le Tirane

"Hold The Hands Of All People"

Approvals: 46 (Absolutely Anywhere, Eve the First, Kaize, Aldurr, Darth Mall, Kapellen, Northern Sushi, Sobusa, Sodakia, WZ Forums, Gaiah, Republic of Freedonia, Shariann, Jilliland, Aris-Connistan, Punrovia, Musicgirl, Partholan, Selat, Gateborg, United Tribe of Maddox, Elika, Pharan, UntamedFangirls, The Unending Winter, Elghinn, Ryan d, Ghost_Goth, Vanilla Cake, Luxus Mond, Blue Buddhas, Inertialization, Kevin Islands, Hakenium, Bucknerdom, Marion Oaks 2, Alfred and Garfield, Clintoned, Hypnotic Waves, Forumwalker, Of Cascadia, Funkdunk, New Javert, Mikeswill, Nelvaan, Spiritbw)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 83 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Wed Sep 14 2005

Voting ends when Fris gets around to it.

In Fitzland5 government cannot make any endorsements whatso ever on religion. Religion has freedom of expression however.

Government and religion should never mix. Religion belongs in the home and in Church not in government.

Does not allowing same-sex marriage destroy a theocracy? How about banning slavery? That affects something. Genocide? Nope. Sorry. The UN does ban certain ideologies. Theocracies are among the worst the wporld has ever seen but they are welcomed by stupid religious people. So they will stay. Funny, Hitler was loved. Yet we ban some of his practices.

Hack says enough

# Ideological Bans

Okay, so you hate capitalism. That's nice, but you can't ban it. Just like you can't ban communism, socialism, democracy, dictatorships, conservatives, liberals, christians, atheist, or any other political, religous, or economic ideology. While it should go without saying, this is up to the Game Moderator's descretion. You may consider the banning of slavery an oppression of your "economic ideology", we do not.

--------------------------

Considering theology is a built in government type (if you want proof, take a look at the UN regular, the Eternal Kawaii), this would clearly get marked down as an ideological infraction. I note that ideological bans are a subset of game mechanics, because you end up forcing impossible mechanics on them. Admittedly, we have issues of RPed non-compliance, but general fields (like capitalism, socialism, etc) are not just out of one or two issues that you passed though your legislative branch, they are an amalgomation of many decisions made by your nation. As such, the are seen as a game mechanics infraction - the excuse being "ideological ban".

Does not allowing same-sex marriage destroy a theocracy? How about banning slavery? That affects something. Genocide? Nope. Sorry. The UN does ban certain ideologies. Theocracies are among the worst the world has ever seen but they are welcomed by stupid religious people. So they will stay. Funny, Hitler was loved. Yet we ban some of his practices.A more small-minded post I have not read. Sorry, buddy; we can't allow a ban on theocracy just because you are obviously prejudiced against religion and religious people. People may have employed ideology to justify atrocities like slavery and genocide (Marxists being among the worst offenders in that department), but their abolition in no way establishes a precedent for banning theocracy.

A more small-minded post I have not read. Sorry, buddy; we can't allow a ban on theocracy just because you are obviously prejudiced against religion and religious people. People may have employed ideology to justify atrocities like slavery and genocide (Marxists being among the worst offenders in that department), but their abolition in no way establishes a precedent for banning theocracy.

Though We agree that the esteemed delegate of Marxist Rhetoric's response was most undiplomatic, they do raise a valid point about theocracies like Ours.

Our nation's laws are the Received Word of the Eternal Kawaii (may the Cute One be praised), as handed down through Our scriptures and understood by Our heirarchy of otaku. Unlike the acts of "anthropocratic" governments, these laws aren't readily amendable. At most, they can be re-interpreted in the light of a changing world and the gradual increase in human knowledge about it. This is a slow process, but Our people are content with it.

The question We believe Marxist Rhetoric intended to raise was, what happens when the NSUN decides to pass a resolution that conflicts with, to use Us as an example, the Received Word? Fortunately, it rarely happens, but We have had some vigorous arguments in the debate halls trying to stave off that event. Sadly, Our last attempt (the "Adoption and IVF Rights" resolution) failed, and We are stuck trying to figure out how to implement NSUN-mandated laws that are totally at odds with the Received Word. Non-compliance is not a satisfactory solution, and neither is leaving the NSUN in protest.