[GA - PASSED] Religious Freedom Protection

Status
Not open for further replies.
Magecastle

Magecastle

Wolf of the North
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
Magecastle_Embassy_Building_A5
Discord
red_canine
ga.jpg

Religious Freedom Protection
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Magecastle Embassy Building A5 | Onsite Topic​

Recalling that the World Assembly's previous attempt at addressing religious freedoms, "Freedom of Religion", was repealed due to overly restrictive and specific mandates vis-a-vis restrictions on religious practices;

Noting that, while resolutions such as "Freedom of Association" may protect rights such as to gather into religious institutions, there is still no resolution legislating on freedom of religious practice or from state discrimination based on religion,

Recognising the importance of balancing the ability of member nations to take measures to advance compelling, practical interests, and the international protection of the right to religious freedom,

The World Assembly enacts as follows, subject to relevant past World Assembly resolutions still in force _



  1. No member nation, or political or administrative subdivision thereof, may discriminate against any individual for their religion or lack thereof, including by
    1. denying equal protection under the law to those holding or lacking a religion;

    2. enforcing legal penalties for an individual's holding or lack of a religion; or

    3. discriminating against individuals in tax based on their religion or lack thereof.

  2. No individual may be penalised for performing a bona fide religious practice which does not cause positive harm to other individuals. Any restriction upon this right must be vital for the furtherment of a secular interest which outweighs the public's interest in religious freedom.
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

ForAgainstAbstainPresent
11401
 
Last edited:
Overview
This resolution seeks to provide protections for religious freedoms, outlawing systemic discrimination against individuals "based on their religion or lack thereof" -- noting particularly discrimination under the law, in legal penalties, and in taxation -- as well as imposing a legal test upon restrictions on religious practices.

Recommendation
We find that these protections are indeed necessary since "Freedom of Religion" was repealed. Without overly specific mandates like the ones in the repealed "Freedom of Religion", this resolution does just enough in preventing both state discrimination based on religion, and ensuring that restrictions on religious practice are reasonable and justified.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote For the General Assembly Resolution at-vote, "Religious Freedom Protection".

Previous voting thread
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For.

I will note that my previous objections have been resolved to my satisfaction. The test in clause 2 is much better and finds a nice balance between a default right to religious practises and the public interest.
 
Present, as per my previous comments that I don't want to express a view on this matter. I believe in a supreme deity but prefer not to discuss religious issues.
 
Last edited:
Against.
I understand the intention to protect religious freedom, however this resolution at no point differentiates between extremist and more centrally orientated religions. Therefore I find this resolution to be problematic, I question on whether a nation could take decisive action against hate groups based in religious idealism (across the religious world and not centered on one particular religion). I also find that this resolution does include religion within the political divide rather than separate in its origination. With these reservations I cannot vote for the resolution despite its best intentions.
 
Against

I wouldn't normally vote regionally on something already at vote in the WA, but somehow I missed this and feel it necessary. I'm really unhappy with the last clause, which doesn't properly express the balance and burden required in judging the legality of restrictions on the freedoms granted. Particularly, there are many cases where it would be ethically irresponsible to not pass restrictions against harmful practices that do not directly harm individuals (which I'm assuming is what "positive harm" means - your guess is as good as mine). In the opposite direction, the protections granted by the resolution are wholly flawed in their focus on individuals' rights; by this resolution, passing laws that - for example - declare all PWs of a certain religion as unsafe buildings would be permissible, since it is not discriminating directly against individuals.

Tangentially, I'm not sure about the use of underscores - I assumed it was a forum bug until now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top