NationStates Jolt Archive

As some of you may have noticed, I've recently submitted a proposal to make faith schools illegal. Naturally, if you're a regional delegate, I would appreciate your support, and would be happy to answer any questions you may have on the proposal.

However, I'm also opening the floor to debates on the proposal, if anyone wishes. Obviously, don't flame or troll - keep the arguments logical and civilized, please.

EDIT: A copy of the text itself:

Ban on Faith Schools

A resolution to promote funding and the development of education and the arts.


Category: Education and Creativity


Area of Effect: Educational


Proposed by: Free-Armsdonia

Description: RECOGNISING that the role of education is to advance children's understanding of the world and assist their personal development;

REALISING that schools should teach facts, not doctrine, and should therefore follow no particular ideological path;

UNDERSTANDING that many persons hold deep religious beliefs;

RECOGNISING, however, that no religion should be forced upon any person, nor should it interfere unnecessarily with the workings of the state;

RECOGNISING also that educational establishments based upon religious grounds encourage extremism and segregation

The World Assembly hereby declares:

1.The designation of any school, college, university, academy or any other educational establishment that provides a legally recognised non-religious qualification as being of a particular religion or ideology, shall be forbidden;

2.The discrimination towards any current or applying pupil or staff of an educational establisment on the basis of their religion or ideology, assuming that the religion or ideology does not affect their ability to perform the job, shall be forbidden;

3.Religious education shall be of a purely factual nature; no religion or ideology shall be taught in a way that is either favourable or unfavourable towards it, beyond the facts themselves;

4.All other fields of education in educational establishments shall be taught in a purely factual manner, regardless of religious or ideological beliefs of teachers, staff, pupils or parents on the subject;

5.The teaching of any religion in any educational establishment as fact shall be forbidden.

Approvals: 2 (Jimmy Hart, Trialina)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 85 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Tue Oct 28 2008

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/crad40im.png
I'm not sure whether your proposal is legal or not, given the presence of theocracies within the WA, but assuming for the moment it is, I really don't see why you get a proposal to legally enshrine your particular prejudices.

Your proposal also has a distinctly Gradgrindian grate to it.

The insults to this organisations dignity continue. Not only are we or our delegates expected to approve this highly contentious resolution without ever having been asked to help the authors improve it or offer an opinion on its actual merit prior to submission for approval, we are further told to mind our manners as though its authors imagined we were all savages and oafs.

As it is the Government of the Emperor of Urgench finds this resolution to be of far too dubious a utility to urge the delegate for the Axis of Absurdity to approve it.

really it is not the manners of the respected Ambassador's to this organisation which should be being questioned but rather those of the authors of this resolution.


yours e.t.c. ,

Since I happen to have the proposal in question in front of me, I'll be nice and post it.

Category: Education and Creativity


Area of Effect: Educational


Proposed by: Free-Armsdonia

Description: RECOGNISING that the role of education is to advance children's understanding of the world and assist their personal development;

REALISING that schools should teach facts, not doctrine, and should therefore follow no particular ideological path;

UNDERSTANDING that many persons hold deep religious beliefs;

RECOGNISING, however, that no religion should be forced upon any person, nor should it interfere unnecessarily with the workings of the state;

RECOGNISING also that educational establishments based upon religious grounds encourage extremism and segregation

The World Assembly hereby declares:

1.The designation of any school, college, university, academy or any other educational establishment that provides a legally recognised non-religious qualification as being of a particular religion or ideology, shall be forbidden;

2.The discrimination towards any current or applying pupil or staff of an educational establisment on the basis of their religion or ideology, assuming that the religion or ideology does not affect their ability to perform the job, shall be forbidden;

3.Religious education shall be of a purely factual nature; no religion or ideology shall be taught in a way that is either favourable or unfavourable towards it, beyond the facts themselves;

4.All other fields of education in educational establishments shall be taught in a purely factual manner, regardless of religious or ideological beliefs of teachers, staff, pupils or parents on the subject;

5.The teaching of any religion in any educational establishment as fact shall be forbidden.

That would appear to prohibit the existence of seminaries, and teaching of future clergy...
Also, it ignores the fact that there are nations within NS whose deities manifestly do exist.

That would appear to prohibit the existence of seminaries, and teaching of future clergy...
-snip God wank-
It clearly only applies to 'non-religious qualification[s]'.

Nimtiam feels that no one should be forced to attend a religious school, but sees no reason why people should be forced not to, and so, at present, must stand against this proposal.

Hmmm, interesting...

Quintessence of Dust, I hardly see how this enshrines any prejudices of any kind. This proposal would not restrict the practice of religion by individuals or groups that are willing to do so - rather, it would prohibit the interference of religion in education. Since education is, in many countries, an extension of the state, and since in most nations church and state are kept separate, with little disagreement over this, surely this is just a logical extension of this ideal? Religion should not interfere into those who do not have choice over the matter, yet faith schools do this, as the child rarely chooses which school they wish to go to.

We must also remember three things:

1.It is the child receiving the education, not the parent; therefore why should the parent have the right to deny their child a fair, unbiased, good education?

2.Faith schools often encourage segregation - since a great deal of a child's social life and formative years are at school, the ideas they come into contact with influence them a great deal. If they only meet people with the same opinions and beliefs as them, surely they are being shut off from the outside world, and not being prompted to question or inquire about their beliefs and the world? Indeed, schools are meant to encourage children to inquire and question the world around them, whereas most religions preach the precise opposite.

3.Religious schools and states tend to encourage extremism - look at Saudi Arabia, for example.

Also, I've now posted a copy of the text - apologies for not doing so earlier.

Since education is, in many countries, an extension of the state, and since in most nations church and state are kept separate, with little disagreement over this, surely this is just a logical extension of this ideal?

I suspect that theocracies will disagree with you on your second point. And while Nimtiam does have state-sponsored public education we also have private schools that are not affiliated with the state.

Religion should not interfere into those who do not have choice over the matter, yet faith schools do this, as the child rarely chooses which school they wish to go to.
...
1.It is the child receiving the education, not the parent; therefore why should the parent have the right to deny their child a fair, unbiased, good education?

I have a couple of issues with this. Firstly, your proposal includes

any school, college, university, academy or any other educational establishment

In Nimtiam, once a student passes the age of 16 they have the ability to control the school then want to go to. And I'm relatively positive that in almost all countries, colleges and universities, at least, are chosen by the student.

Secondly, we recognize that part of parents' job is to make decisions for their children until the children are old enough to do it themselves. While the state limits that for the protection of the child, parenting rights must also be recognized. Parents must send their children to school, but as long as that school meets the educational guidelines set out by the government, it is their choice.

It seems like you're justifying such intrusion with this:

If [the students] only meet people with the same opinions and beliefs as them, surely they are being shut off from the outside world, and not being prompted to question or inquire about their beliefs and the world?

By this logic you would be able to justify forcing people with children not to live in certain towns by saying that everyone in that town had too similar views. That argument is ridiculous in our opinion.

Indeed, schools are meant to encourage children to inquire and question the world around them, whereas most religions preach the precise opposite.

This is a huge generalization. In Nimtiam's experience there are many religions that contribute positively to inquiry by providing a different way of looking at things than the scientific ones.

3.Religious schools and states tend to encourage extremism - look at Saudi Arabia, for example.

OOC: Strictly speaking, Saudi Arabia doesn't exist in the NS world.
IC: Again a huge generalization. I point you to my comment above.

In conclusion, the People's Republic of Nimtiam sees no convincing need to restrict people's choice to learn in the institution that suits them, or to restrict parents' right to send their children to a institution that suits them, so long as such an institution fulfills the educational requirements of the state.

This proposition is absurb. It would seems it will shut down all my theology departments in all my universities, if this resolution is ever to pass. What about once a week course in religious history in high school? What about Sunday religious class for the confirmation in roman catholic churches? What about people who wants to become priest, pastor, etc...??

This proposal would not restrict the practice of religion by individuals or groups that are willing to do so - rather, it would prohibit the interference of religion in education.

That's hardly true. This resolution seeks to ban any mention of religion in all schools and religious institutions.

Since education is, in many countries, an extension of the state, and since in most nations church and state are kept separate, with little disagreement over this
Maybe in some countries it's true. But even in many democracies of RL, religious institutions had prominents role in education of middle school. Not all educational facilities are secular... Look at catholic schools in England, Scotland, New Zealand, Wales, Norther Island, many Latin America countries, Canada (in Quebec), Malasia, Unites States... (I'm sure I forgot many more)..

The insults to this organisations dignity continue. Not only are we or our delegates expected to approve this highly contentious resolution without ever having been asked to help the authors improve it or offer an opinion on its actual merit prior to submission for approval, we are further told to mind our manners as though its authors imagined we were all savages and oafs.

As it is the Government of the Emperor of Urgench finds this resolution to be of far too dubious a utility to urge the delegate for the Axis of Absurdity to approve it.

really it is not the manners of the respected Ambassador's to this organisation which should be being questioned but rather those of the authors of this resolution.


yours e.t.c. ,

Again Embassador Urgench is bombastic, instead of telling this assembly why he disagrees with this proposition so new members can improve the resolution and be encouraged to participate in future debate, he just shut them down with sarcastic comments without any substance...

MapleLeafss;14135400']Again Embassador Urgench is bombastic, instead of telling this assembly why he disagrees with this proposition so new members can improve the resolution and be encouraged to participate in future debate, he just shut them down with sarcastic comments without any substance...


We meant exactly what we said in exactly the way our words would suggest we meant them to be understood, honoured Ambassador. No sarcasm was at play, how exactly our words could actually shut down anything is beyond us, we were merely expressing our genuine concern over the utility of this resolution and exasperation that we are being asked to discuss and perhaps even endorse it before any legislative oversight which the w.a. might have been able to offer was sought prior to submission.

Since we are gravely concerned over the actual legality of this proposal we are all the more expasperated since this statute may well prove a waste of this organisation's time and energy.


yours, e.t.c. ,

Klemonland aggresively rejects this proposal and looks forward to seeing it fluttering about the landfill.

even though i would never ban faith schools in my nation, i understand what your saying. all i have to say is that this will never pass not matter how much you try. the implications are too sharply pointed at theocracies (a large sum of WA nations) also, you're proposal doesn't say to ban faith from public schools, that, based on the language, i might support, however, you proposals wants to BAN ALL FAITH IN SCHOOLS.

with all due respect. it will never pass.

in fact, if this proposal does ever get anywhere, it will be in opposition of my very long due Education Act that i have been working on for a long time (and there is a forum for it on the site titled as mentioned before). in my proposal i state that all nations basically have the right to futher whatever religious beliefs they have..etc. so if my bill is ever passed and so is yours, they would be quite contradictory.

Hmmm, interesting...

Quintessence of Dust, I hardly see how this enshrines any prejudices of any kind.
Sure it does. You might as well call it the 'I think religious people are fucking numbskulls Act of 2008'.
Since education is, in many countries, an extension of the state,
False assumption: many nations have private or decentralised education systems.
and since in most nations church and state are kept separate, with little disagreement over this,
Can you prove the 'most' part of this? There are many different styles of government within the WA, including theocracies.
Religion should not interfere into those who do not have choice over the matter, yet faith schools do this, as the child rarely chooses which school they wish to go to.
Ok. But why not other aspects of school choice? You're picking one aspect - the faith of the school - but leaving out many other salient characteristics - the language of the school, its location, its academic concentration, whether it's single-sex or co-ed. These are all areas in which children get no choice under your scenario. Why is this topic more valid of legislation than any other? Why is this not a proposal about the holistic educational philosophy of the school?
1.It is the child receiving the education, not the parent; therefore why should the parent have the right to deny their child a fair, unbiased, good education?
Firstly, your proposal also concerns universities, where it is not a 'child' but in general a free adult making the decision to attend.

Secondly, see my point above about why this is an isolated standard.
2.Faith schools often encourage segregation - since a great deal of a child's social life and formative years are at school, the ideas they come into contact with influence them a great deal. If they only meet people with the same opinions and beliefs as them, surely they are being shut off from the outside world, and not being prompted to question or inquire about their beliefs and the world? Indeed, schools are meant to encourage children to inquire and question the world around them, whereas most religions preach the precise opposite.
You're right - how could I possibly have assumed you were the least bit prejudiced! You hold the Catholic down, I'll get him in the kidneys.

This is just a legal expression of your own bigotry, and if it passes I plan to draft one stating and enforcing my dislike for people who take milk with their coffee.

I am very opposed to this. It places an across the board ban on religious teaching which will affect, well, all religions. With that ban, then there's no sunday schools either. Religions could be rendered ineffective. In Rutianas, we believe that religion is just another type of school to be attended. A school of morality. Religions must be free to teach these morality lessons to it's followers.

And before someone decides to comment on the morality issue, yes, there are some who's morality can be viewed as immorality by someone else. I don't exactly care what someone else follows. What I care about is that a person should be free to teach what they choose to others.

However, that said, I would support a ban that keeps faith based teaching out of government funded public schools, not to include university. Let faith based schools be privately funded. If the parents are the only source of funding, they should have a say on what's being taught.

Paula Jenner - Rutianas Ambassador

3.Religious education shall be of a purely factual nature; no religion or ideology shall be taught in a way that is either favourable or unfavourable towards it, beyond the facts themselves;

4.All other fields of education in educational establishments shall be taught in a purely factual manner, regardless of religious or ideological beliefs of teachers, staff, pupils or parents on the subject;

5.The teaching of any religion in any educational establishment as fact shall be forbidden.


It would seem to His Majesty, that provisions 3,4 and 5 are contradictory. Does "factual nature" mean historical?

On a different note. The Holy Empire of Alarician Inquisitions was founded with religion near the center of its constitution. Over the centuries, the Inquisition has become more and more secular, but that does not mean that religion is a forbidden topic of education.

Within the Holy Empire are a number of universities that focus on understanding religion from all parts of the world. This proposal seems to ban that.

Moreover, His Majesty fears the social unrest that would engulf the country -- His Majesty was crowned by the head of the Church -- his divine right would be jeopardy.

Our case is not the only one in the WA. There many "Holy Empires." This proposal, in the eyes of His Majesty, is a biased proposal that seeks to eliminate this group of nations.

With all due respect, The Holy Empire of Alarician Inquisitions will oppose this measure, since the title "Holy Empire" would effectively be removed from the WA.

MapleLeafss;14135380']This proposition is absurb. It would seems it will shut down all my theology departments in all my universities, if this resolution is ever to pass.

Please read the proposal - it clearly refers to 'non-religious qualifications'

Originally posted by quintessence of dust
Sure it does. You might as well call it the 'I think religious people are fucking numbskulls Act of 2008

So the American government (apologies for using the real world again), being secular, believes that all religions are dumb? Secularism, my friend, not atheism.

Ok. But why not other aspects of school choice? You're picking one aspect - the faith of the school - but leaving out many other salient characteristics - the language of the school, its location, its academic concentration, whether it's single-sex or co-ed. These are all areas in which children get no choice under your scenario. Why is this topic more valid of legislation than any other? Why is this not a proposal about the holistic educational philosophy of the school?

Because for many of these other factors the state simply has no control over them, and for the rest the educational impact is unclear, whereas for faith schools this is both something where the government has control, and which clearly affects education (religious studies for one).

Originally posted by Rutianas
I am very opposed to this. It places an across the board ban on religious teaching which will affect, well, all religions. With that ban, then there's no sunday schools either. Religions could be rendered ineffective. In Rutianas, we believe that religion is just another type of school to be attended. A school of morality. Religions must be free to teach these morality lessons to it's followers.

Sunday schools would not be banned, as they do not provide a non-religious qualification. Moreover, schools of religious education or instruction would still be perfectly legal, as they do not provide a non-religious qualification. This proposal would only ban religion from interfering in secular education.


Originally posted by Alarician Inquisitions
Within the Holy Empire are a number of universities that focus on understanding religion from all parts of the world. This proposal seems to ban that.

Education about religion remains perfectly legal - it is only the education of religion as fact, or religion interfering in secular subjects, that is banned by this proposal.

And in response to Quintessence of Dust's accusations of bigotry - what on earth are you talking about? Just because a great number of Western faith schools are Catholic doesn't mean that I've anything against them. Nor does this bill discriminate against any religion in particular. Kindly keep your own prejudices in check before posting such comments.

Please read the proposal - it clearly refers to 'non-religious qualifications'

But look at your article 5, "The teaching of any religion in any educational establishment as fact shall be forbidden.", this article is far too broad and it seems to ban all teaching of religion and theology, since the very definition of religion is a set of myths , or 'truths' that only believer of certain religion adheres...

Ok. But why not other aspects of school choice? You're picking one aspect - the faith of the school - but leaving out many other salient characteristics - the language of the school, its location, its academic concentration, whether it's single-sex or co-ed. These are all areas in which children get no choice under your scenario. Why is this topic more valid of legislation than any other? Why is this not a proposal about the holistic educational philosophy of the school?
Because for many of these other factors the state simply has no control over them, and for the rest the educational impact is unclear, whereas for faith schools this is both something where the government has control, and which clearly affects education (religious studies for one).
I'm sorry, you'll need to do better than proof by repeated assertion here. The state has at least as much control over all the factors mentioned as it does the faith of the school, and with the possible exception of language in monocultures they all have a demonstrable if not well understood impact on education. Frankly, with the solitary exception of Religious Education (which I put on a par with Sociology in the Bloody Useless Stakes) it's not clear that faith does have an effect on education, so even that needs some justification.

5.The teaching of any religion in any educational establishment as fact shall be forbidden.


His Majesty remains heavily concerned on this issue. All of the Holy Empire of Alarician Inquisition's high school civics courses place an emphasis of demonstrating the divine right of His Majesty as something that cannot possibly be argued on. His Majesty's crown is absolute and it is through His divine inspiration and under His wisdom that the government operates in the form of a bicameral legislature, ministerial branches, inquisitorial districts, etc.

Eliminating this education that His Majesty is of divine appointment will only cause massive social unrest which will be put down by His Majesty's Most Holy Inquisition. It would serve as the bulwark of various anarchist cells and a myriad of radical political factions to overthrow His Majesty's government. Revolution is imminent -- something that is equal to heresy in our country.

The precedent: No religion to be taught in schools as fact.

What is next? Separation of Church and State?

His Majesty cannot tolerate such action for without the Church directly influencing secular practices, not only would the name "Holy Empire" be stricken from the name of our country, but so would "Inquisitions."

As the representative for the Sacred Kingdom of Karianis, I have to strongly oppose this proposal as well. Religion in my country isn't just a 'belief', it is fact, as our Queen is guided directly by the Great Mother, our Goddess, and as such, religion is a very real, every day fact in my home. Trying to remove religion from any aspect of Karianis would be like trying to remove water from a fishtank. We are, in every thought of the word, a theocracy. And we're not the only ones.

Anti-theism of any sort in WA proposals is almost always guaranteed to cross the line into interfering with our ideology - which is illegal. But please, let me go about this in a proper manner.

Article one states: "The designation of any school, college, university, academy or any other educational establishment that provides a legally recognised non-religious qualification as being of a particular religion or ideology, shall be forbidden;"

Schools are run by the government in Karianis, which, as I've said, is a religious organization in and of itself, which makes the schools themselves religious by extension. As such, you've effectively just banned schools in my home, period.

Article two states: "The discrimination towards any current or applying pupil or staff of an educational establisment on the basis of their religion or ideology, assuming that the religion or ideology does not affect their ability to perform the job, shall be forbidden."

Only members of our faith are permitted to be citizens of Karianis, and only ministers are permitted to be teachers. As such, this article is effectively useless. All teachers and pupils in Karian schools follow our religion.

Article three states: "Religious education shall be of a purely factual nature; no religion or ideology shall be taught in a way that is either favourable or unfavourable towards it, beyond the facts themselves"

Religion for us is a factual thing, our Goddess is an everyday, real presence. The only religion in Karianis is ours, and none other is taught. Further more, all children in Karianis are taught to follow our religion. It's one of the requirements for citizenship. This article would effectively force us to start denying citizenship to thousands of children as they graduate each year, effectively dooming our country. This is unacceptable, even if article one weren't already bad enough.

Article four states: "All other fields of education in educational establishments shall be taught in a purely factual manner, regardless of religious or ideological beliefs of teachers, staff, pupils or parents on the subject."

This article makes no sense at all. Why would religion change math, for example? (OOC: I'm assuming this is based on the creationism versus evolution theory argument. While that's great for RL, in NS, it means nothing, as each nation can be from very, very different worlds where creation by a deity may bey a very, very real thing - or from worlds where gods literally do not exist and evolution is the only reason people exist. This article really doesn't belong.)

Article five states: "The teaching of any religion in any educational establishment as fact shall be forbidden."

Unacceptable. Totally unacceptable. Religion is fact to us, as I've already stated several times. This drives an arm of our religious government, the schools, into a secularism that is totally foreign to Karianis, and would, in the long run, ruin us. It would also anger our Goddess, who would be very likely to do something unpleasant to someone.

Now, to further note something, we are a very moderate nation. Very peaceful, willing to do trade with nearly anyone. We've never started a war, tried to commit genocide, or denied someone aid for any reason. We simply require that all citizens be of our faith, and none but our citizenry, with a few very, very small exceptions, are permitted to live within the borders of our country. Saying that we're probably extremists just because our Goddess is real, and therefore our religion, as well, is rather insulting, and patently not true.

We stand in opposition of this. Should it come to vote in any form, I will campaign nonstop against the passing of this bill, no matter how many times it comes to a vote.

It would be a terrible atrocity and a step backwards for something such as this to pass. Discrimination and lack of freedoms is not what society needs enforce. People should be able to be educated as they choose, not "educated" in a manner to make people forget their religious background, or "educated" in a manner to force people to be religious, in our most strong opinion.

His Majesty's government applauds the eloquent arguments brought forward by the honorable delegate from The Sacred Kingdom of Karianis as well as the firm stance of the Karthonian government on this proposal.

His Majesty eagerly awaits the respected Free-Armsdonian delegate's responses to these issues.

I speak for my entire country when I say, "That is one of the most pointless suggestions I have ever had the misfortune of reading."

The Holy Republic of Genian States is not one to accept that it's entire reason to be a country is going to be, or is being thought of being wiped away. The Genian States would in fact, as Alarician Inquisitions has put it, be put into complete and utter civil war.

The Holy Republic was completely based on the FACT that its god created human kind and unified all of the warring states. These things are extremely important for the people to know! Children cannot roam the streets speaking of things that morals and faith despise of!

What would happen if say you DID ban education of religion? My country would fall apart! People would begin to question why the government stands as it does, at the same time NOT KNOWING why the nation itself was built, and end up overthrowing what took three-thousand years to accomplish!

The Holy Republic of Genian States strongly disagrees with the suggestion proposed and discussed.

While the Peoples of Sasquatewain are a secular (if not to say atheist) people and therefore more than understand the arguments used within this proposal, we are also a very open-minded people and therefore cannot possibly stand by it.

We might believe religion to be rubish and foolishness, but it is a rubish and foolishness which we must allow others to believe in.

The Peoples of Sasquatewain will in no way be backing this proposal.

It clearly only applies to 'non-religious qualification[s]'.
Clause #1 does, and clause #2 could arguably be used to ensure that the teaching staff at seminaries belong to the appropriate faith, but the other clauses are just as clearly worded so as to cover ALL educational establishments...

I feel that I ought to clarify what I intended by this proposal.

I do NOT wish to ban the education of religion - banning a certain type of learning would be foolishness itself.

Nor do I wish to ban the practice of religion among consenting persons - freedom of thought and belief is a basic human right.

Rather, I wish to prevent the education of religion as fact, or the brainwashing of children into a particular religion, or the prevention of them coming into contact with different religious ideas.

My apologies to those nations who maintain theocratic or similar systems of government - the moderators will therefore have to decide on the legality of the proposal.

I feel that I ought to clarify what I intended by this proposal.

I do NOT wish to ban the education of religion - banning a certain type of learning would be foolishness itself.

Nor do I wish to ban the practice of religion among consenting persons - freedom of thought and belief is a basic human right.

Rather, I wish to prevent the education of religion as fact, or the brainwashing of children into a particular religion, or the prevention of them coming into contact with different religious ideas.

My apologies to those nations who maintain theocratic or similar systems of government - the moderators will therefore have to decide on the legality of the proposal.


This may well have been the respected Ambassador's intent, but the wording of their delegation's resolution goes further than there intent and in any event is of such a narrow and specific nature that it was bound to do so.

The approach is what could be readdressed to prevent more controversial outcomes respected Ambassador.


yours e.t.c. ,

Article one states: "The designation of any school, college, university, academy or any other educational establishment that provides a legally recognised non-religious qualification as being of a particular religion or ideology, shall be forbidden;"

Schools are run by the government in Karianis, which, as I've said, is a religious organization in and of itself, which makes the schools themselves religious by extension. As such, you've effectively just banned schools in my home, period.
OOC: Or you could simply make gaining any qualification require passing an exam in religious knowledge as well as whatever exams are required for the other subject[s] involved, so that there aren't any "legally recognised non-religious qualifications" at all in your system... That would seem to be legal under clause #4 as long as you keep the teaching of the actual subjects separate...

I quite like number 5: The teaching of any religion in any educational establishment as fact shall be forbidden.

So any classes that may teach about various religions and how they came about and their hsitory etc, is forbidden because they are facts. Though I'm sure that the writer of this proposal would have a few "facts" of his own on religions.

Rather, I wish to prevent the education of religion as fact, or the brainwashing of children into a particular religion

And here is why this proposal fails, this petty notion that all relgious schools seek to brainwash their students and the notion that brainwashing does not happen in public schools.

Rather, I wish to prevent the education of religion as fact, or the brainwashing of children into a particular religion, or the prevention of them coming into contact with different religious ideas.

Because you seem to believe that no religion can be a real, tangible, factual thing, and that introducing children to such religions is nothing but brainwashing, indicates your extreme bias against religion - a bias that is very clear in your proposal and why you have refused to alter or remove it, despite numerous ambassadors of both theocratic and secular origins stating oppositions to every point. I'm not worried about it's legality. If it were totally illegal, it likely would have been said so by now by the persons in charge of such things. I'm bothered by your total refusal to consider a change to the wording of this proposal.

OOC: Or you could simply make gaining any qualification require passing an exam in religious knowledge as well as whatever exams are required for the other subject[s] involved, so that there aren't any "legally recognised non-religious qualifications" at all in your system... That would seem to be legal under clause #4 as long as you keep the teaching of the actual subjects separate...

(OOC: Check my rebuttal for article two. All teachers in Karianis are also ministers and such. ;) )

(OOC: Check my rebuttal for article two. All teachers in Karianis are also ministers and such. ;) )
OOC: Checked and agreed: in the case of 'religious' schools, which is a category into which (as my own work-round for clause #1 showed) it would be easy enough to place ALL of a nation's schools, it would seem perfectly reasonable -- rather than discriminatory -- to require that teaching staff be practicing members of the religion concerned, because disbelief on their part WOULD " affect their ability to perform the job".

Now for clauses #3-5...

3.Religious education shall be of a purely factual nature; no religion or ideology shall be taught in a way that is either favourable or unfavourable towards it, beyond the facts themselves;
Of course, to true believers, the church's doctrines ARE "factual"... ;)

4.All other fields of education in educational establishments shall be taught in a purely factual manner, regardless of religious or ideological beliefs of teachers, staff, pupils or parents on the subject;See my work-around for clause #3.
Also, there's nothing to keep nations from making all fields of education about which such controversies could arise parts of the theological side -- rather than the 'mundane' side -- of their schools' syllabus e.g. by having courses in 'The Wonders of God's Creation' rather than in 'Biology', 'Geology' &/or 'Astronomy'...

5.The teaching of any religion in any educational establishment as fact shall be forbidden.But if you teach it as a matter of 'Sincere Belief', emphasising that point frequently, then that would be legal under this proposal and probably (especially if you don't allow any contradictory viewpoints to be taught) be quite effective anyway...
Incidentally, how would this proposal's author expect this clause to be applied if somebody were to find (or found) a religion whose doctrines include a heliocentric solar system, evolution, the atomic theory of matter, and the germ theory of disease?

Rather, I wish to prevent the education of religion as fact, or the brainwashing of children into a particular religion, or the prevention of them coming into contact with different religious ideas.

And that's a bridge too far for us. We're big fans on banning religious indoctrination in our own schools - this is just one reason why the Altan Steppes doesn't allow private schools. (There are many others, but I digress.)

But when we start telling other nations that they can't full their childrens' heads full of religious mush, well, that's another thing altogether. We wouldn't do it, but hey, that's our way of educating. Do we think the Altan Steppes way of educating - or the Free-Armsdonia way, for that matter - should be imposed on all nations? No.

Sorry, but we're opposed to this.

-Jaris Krytellin, Ambassador