NationStates Jolt Archive

Violent violetists

13-11-2003, 00:55
I assume most of you have had this issue already, so I'll ask, what did you end up deciding? You don't have to tell me the outcome, I'm just having a hard time trying to decide what to do and wanted to see what others chose. If you don't remember what the issue was about, a recap:

The Issue

Members of a new weird religious cult, called the Order of Violet, ask for the government to appease their mighty god by offering Her a sacrifice of the human variety.

The Debate

"What have we got to lose?" says religious freedoms advocate Clint Utopia. "Just cut up a few homeless folk- it appeases this group's bloodthirsty Goddess, gets rid of unsightly bums that drain welfare, and everybody goes home happy."

"We must go much further than a few beggars!" argues the overzealous High Member of the Order of Violet, Akira Clinton. "You must pass a law that everyone’s first born child must be slaughtered, on live TV if possible. Think of the viewing figures!"

"You aren't going to listen to these whackjob Violetists, are you?" comments Clint McAlpin while leading a prayer group. "Human sacrifices! Surely we're too civilized to permit such barbaric practices! These lunatic fringe groups should be outlawed, their leaders should be executed!"

"Who's being a lunatic?" retorts George W. Mombota of the Eponya Humanitarian Society. "I agree that these practices ought to be outlawed, but instead of sinking to the same level of these fanatics and killing our fellow people, why not simply start a re-education program? Even the worst person can be rehabilitated into a useful member of society, with enough time, care, and lots and lots of funding!"
The Global Market
13-11-2003, 01:06
This and the Gun Control Resolutions are arguably the two worst ones. Here it's either: kill people, kill more people, kill yet more people, put people in jail for their religious beliefs. I do a resounding dismissal.
13-11-2003, 01:36
Would the fourth actually be putting them in jail? I almost picked that one, but the "lots and lots of funding" part stopped me because I figured it would lower my economy level even more.
13-11-2003, 03:22
As far as I'm concerned, the harder it is to choose, the better the issue. :wink:
13-11-2003, 03:24
i think i picked the 3 one but not sure

Agent 9
The Red Bat
13-11-2003, 07:31
As far as I'm concerned, the harder it is to choose, the better the issue. :wink:

Or the more likely you are to dismiss and ignore it. Especially on a stupid subject like this one, how did it get past the moderators?
Henry Kissenger
13-11-2003, 07:33
i think that is outrageous.
13-11-2003, 13:37
I would say that the harder it is to choose, the more likely it is that there are no realistic options for your type of nation.
13-11-2003, 14:22
I liked it. It is silly, but it raises the very real question of limitations upon religious freedom. No rights or freedoms are absolute, that is simply a falacy. The question becomes how do we enforce those limitations, and where do we draw the line. The final option says nothing about jail, it talks about re-education. A perfectly legitimate option, unless your economy is your God, in which case you may prefer to sacrifice the loss of a few non-financially-contributing members of your society. There is at least one nation in my region that I'm sure would choose the first option, and be happy with it. I chose the last.