The Additional Religious Observance Act.

PaulWallLibertarian42

PaulWallLibertarian42

TNPer
Yes our role play religions have been debated to death. It has been suggested we should play another tune and I do agree with those sentiments; however before we do I would like to introduce some legislation that would bring some equality under the law. Since the religious compromise bill failed as was the will of this assembly then the only way another religion can be recognized is by going through the same process Flemingovianism did. Fair enough. Hopefully this will just be a rubber stamp affair however; I do not think this assembly would want to show bias and not afford equal protection under the law to other religious instiutions.

Without futher delay here is a proposal I hashed out in about 5 minutes.

Section 7.4 Additional Religious Observances

20. The Discordian Church of The Flying Spaghetti Monster shall be adopted as an offical recognized religion and church of The North Pacific.

21. All nations are guaranteed freedom of expression of all, any, or no religious belief, and that freedom shall not be curtailed.

22. The Discordian Flying Spaghetti Monster religion shall receive no financial or tax advantages through being the religion of The North Pacific.

23. Holidays of The Discordian Flying Spaghetti Monster religion shall be observed regionally, and all nations shall have the right to take a day off work, unpaid, on those holidays. Government officials are excluded from the effects of this clause.

24. No nation shall serve on the cabinet or any other appointed government position by virtue of their status in The Discordian Flying Spaghetti Monster religion.

25. Discordian Flying Spaghetti Monster officials may participate, as invited by the delegate, at all state functions.
Click to expand...

EDIT: Proposal updated to remove references to Church of Thirteen per Treize's request
 
So by shit you mean cut out providing equal protection under the law to other tnp faith groups? It is either everyone gets included or no one gets included. I have the TNPCLU (The North Pacific Civil Liberty Union) on speed dial.
 
So sick of this already. I'm abstaining to all religious debate and voting. Let me know when this RA stop acting like children so we can get back to the real issues.
 
I'm personally impressed by the streak of intelligent decisions the proposer has made since their arrival. I'm looking forward to their contributions going forward. :)
 
The Church of the Thirteen is not interested in being mentioned in this bill.

I am convinced the "opponents" of Flemingovianism are secret Fleminogivanists trying their best to make sure Flemingovianism remains the religion for medamned ever.
 
I love how right after he was fired from the flem minister post he joined two others and is now advocating for them without any consideration of the actual people who started it. Also way to copy paste the entire bill.
 
Egalotir:
I love how right after he was fired from the flem minister post he joined two others and is now advocating for them without any consideration of the actual people who started it. Also way to copy paste the entire bill.
Click to expand...
:tb2:
 
Egalotir:
I love how right after he was fired from the flem minister post he joined two others and is now advocating for them without any consideration of the actual people who started it. Also way to copy paste the entire bill.
Click to expand...
Egalitor read past archived debates on this tipic it had been suggested if in the future another religion sought approval they should propose their own legislation preferable as a seperate section and use the existing law as a template. That is whay was done here.

Any affiliations or non affiliation I may or may not have out side of this assembly is pf no consequence. For standing up for indivdual liberty and expression. I am thinking real hard about seriously starting an advocacy group the TNPCLU to fight for and safeguard citizens bill of rights and equsl protection under the law. Be that action in the assembly or filing reviews with the court. For too long has our constiution been trampled by evil oligarchs. No more. And this is on my own independent and seperate of any other duties or responsibilities I may hold in the region. So please do not lump that in. I am fully capable of divorcing my role play roles and playing them seperate. Cheers! :)
 
PaulWallLibertarian42:
Egalotir:
I love how right after he was fired from the flem minister post he joined two others and is now advocating for them without any consideration of the actual people who started it. Also way to copy paste the entire bill.
Click to expand...
Egalitor read past archived debates on this tipic it had been suggested if in the future another religion sought approval they should propose their own legislation preferable as a seperate section and use the existing law as a template. That is whay was done here.

Any affiliations or non affiliation I may or may not have out side of this assembly is pf no consequence. For standing up for indivdual liberty and expression. I am thinking real hard about seriously starting an advocacy group the TNPCLU to fight for and safeguard citizens bill of rights and equsl protection under the law. Be that action in the assembly or filing reviews with the court. For too long has our constiution been trampled by evil oligarchs. No more. And this is on my own independent and seperate of any other duties or responsibilities I may hold in the region. So please do not lump that in. I am fully capable of divorcing my role play roles and playing them seperate. Cheers! :)
Click to expand...
While I respect that I still think you're taking it too far with "evil monarchs" trampling rights. Gross overstatement. In TNP we're free to practice whatever religion we want and I dont think we need fancy papers telling us this for every single crazy rp we come up with. Where do we draw the line? At a Nazi religion?
 
This is why tying a religion's official recognition to an RA vote was a bad idea. Grosse's compromise was probably the best solution. Take a bow RA. :clap:

Egalotir:
In TNP we're free to practice whatever religion we want and I dont think we need fancy papers telling us this for every single crazy rp we come up with. Where do we draw the line?
Click to expand...
Well.. that's where we are now. Any line drawn now would violate the BOR.
 
falapatorius:
This is why tying a religion's official recognition to an RA vote was a bad idea. Grosse's compromise was probably the best solution. Take a bow RA. :clap:

Egalotir:
In TNP we're free to practice whatever religion we want and I dont think we need fancy papers telling us this for every single crazy rp we come up with. Where do we draw the line?
Click to expand...
Well.. that's where we are now. Any line drawn now would violate the BOR.
Click to expand...
That's why I think flem's rules is enough on having freedom of religion and through the wording could be extended to protect all the other rp ones now and in the future. We dont need a seperate vote or clause for every single one. It's a waste of resources and space.
 
Egalotir:
That's why I think flem's rules is enough on having freedom of religion and through the wording could be extended to protect all the other rp ones now and in the future. We dont need a seperate vote or clause for every single one. It's a waste of resources and space.
Click to expand...
Why should only Flemingovianism be 'officially' recognized? Discriminatory? You decide. As you know, I'm completely against legally enshrining a religion, but fair is fair. :shrug:
 
falapatorius:
Egalotir:
That's why I think flem's rules is enough on having freedom of religion and through the wording could be extended to protect all the other rp ones now and in the future. We dont need a seperate vote or clause for every single one. It's a waste of resources and space.
Click to expand...
Why should only Flemingovianism be 'officially' recognized? Discriminatory? You decide. As you know, I'm completely against legally enshrining a religion, but fair is fair. :shrug:
Click to expand...
Again the way I see it his is mearly a name that sets it up for all the other religions and it's just redundant to make a law for every single one. The religion debate has run it's course already
 
The original proposal does allow for additional religions to be added. In order for them to be added to that section of the law, it is your responsibility to convince Assembly members that the Religion is deserving of official recognition. All I can see about this religion is a couple of posts. It has been around for like a couple of weeks?

Maybe wait and see - if it actually contributes to TNP culture for a prolonged period of time it may be more likely to be granted official recogntion.

Until then.. a solid Nay from me. Or alternatively, if other RA members are agreeable, I may motion that this proposal not go to a vote at all.

Egalotir:
I love how right after he was fired from the flem minister post he joined two others and is now advocating for them without any consideration of the actual people who started it. Also way to copy paste the entire bill.
Click to expand...
:agree: . Though no real surprise.

Crushing Our Enemies:
Can we just cut this shit out already? I wasn't even here for most of it and I'm already sick of this nonsense.
Click to expand...

:agree:
 
Not necessarily. You can reread my post if you like. What I want is our cultural provisions in the Legal Code to reflect matters and "things" that are culturally important/significant to the region.
 
I have no problem with this bill going to vote.

However, I think there is a logical fallacy in saying "if this does not PASS the regional Assembly is breaking the Bill of Rights". The assembly has the right to recognise religions, but that does not mean that it is obliged to. It certainly does not prove the existence of evil oligarchs.

I also think there is a matter of timing. Proposing this at a time when the assembly is clearly fatigued with this whole issue might suggest to some that what the proposer is actually interested in is excrement-stirring and keeping this issue going.

If he is actually interested in this passing, then patience might be wiser. But whatever.
 
McM:
What I want is our cultural provisions in the Legal Code to reflect matters and "things" that are culturally important/significant to the region
Click to expand...
You're entitled to your opinion, but I hope you're not presuming to speak for the RA. Vote as you will, but PWL42 has every right to propose bills to the RA, regardless of what you feel their cultural importance/significance to the region may or may not be. You don't speak for TNP.
 
falapatorius:
McM:
What I want is our cultural provisions in the Legal Code to reflect matters and "things" that are culturally important/significant to the region
Click to expand...
You're entitled to your opinion, but I hope you're not presuming to speak for the RA. Vote as you will, but PWL42 has every right to propose bills to the RA, regardless of what you feel their cultural importance/significance to the region may or may not be. You don't speak for TNP.
Click to expand...
Um. I very clearly said that is what I want.
 
Egalotir:
falapatorius:
This is why tying a religion's official recognition to an RA vote was a bad idea. Grosse's compromise was probably the best solution. Take a bow RA. :clap:

Egalotir:
In TNP we're free to practice whatever religion we want and I dont think we need fancy papers telling us this for every single crazy rp we come up with. Where do we draw the line?
Click to expand...
Well.. that's where we are now. Any line drawn now would violate the BOR.
Click to expand...
That's why I think flem's rules is enough on having freedom of religion and through the wording could be extended to protect all the other rp ones now and in the future. We dont need a seperate vote or clause for every single one. It's a waste of resources and space.
Click to expand...
Thats what I thought the religious compromise bill would accomplish and make it where other faith groups would be included by way of general blanket statements and new faith groups would not have to submit their own legislation.

As it stands now by reading this comments I feel I am inferring people in this assembly do not want any other religion mentioned in the legal code. Which is a slipery slope to violating non flemites. And is not providing equal protection under the law. The law of inclusion - all potential faith groups ought to be recongized or none should be. :/
 
And perhaps it may be bad timing. It was not my intent to stir anything. Other then bring up a legitiment point of equality under the law. Even OOC in RL I would fight for a faith group not my own to have valid recognition under the law. Now back IC. I felt after the inital repeals and such had been over for a month or so now...and things have seemingly died down abiet for some joke proposals..I would throw this out and see what happens. Maybe have legit debate. I have no problem with flemingovianism being in the legal code - yes I was in favor of a more generalized statement; regardless of any support I may personally have for Flemingovianism (I still support recongition and equality for others - it is part of my principles) - but it is what it is. But my point stands if one group is included so should others be. That is my only point. I am not trying to stir anything other then to urge this assembly to be more inclusive and tolerant of others and to provide different groups the same equal protection under law that the great religion of Flemingovianism has recieved. I had been mulling proposing something when the RA members had said in past debates that if other religions want recognition they could make a seperate section as an additional recogniton pattered off the flem bill. I was waiting for other faith groups to pop up and maybe see if their leaders would make a similar proposal as mine to seek equal protection. I got impaitent and so submitted it myself.

And Treize - If the Church of The Thirteen does not wish to seek equal protection and offical recognition at this time later when I have more time I will go back and edit the proposal to remove any references to your church. Thanks.
 
And Treize - If the Church of The Thirteen does not wish to seek equal protection and offical recognition at this time later when I have more time I will go back and edit the proposal to remove any references to your church. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Did you not ask them whether they wanted to be included before drafting the legislation? :duh:
 
PaulWallLibertarian42:
Egalotir:
falapatorius:
This is why tying a religion's official recognition to an RA vote was a bad idea. Grosse's compromise was probably the best solution. Take a bow RA. :clap:

Egalotir:
In TNP we're free to practice whatever religion we want and I dont think we need fancy papers telling us this for every single crazy rp we come up with. Where do we draw the line?
Click to expand...
Well.. that's where we are now. Any line drawn now would violate the BOR.
Click to expand...
That's why I think flem's rules is enough on having freedom of religion and through the wording could be extended to protect all the other rp ones now and in the future. We dont need a seperate vote or clause for every single one. It's a waste of resources and space.
Click to expand...
Thats what I thought the religious compromise bill would accomplish and make it where other faith groups would be included by way of general blanket statements and new faith groups would not have to submit their own legislation.

As it stands now by reading this comments I feel I am inferring people in this assembly do not want any other religion mentioned in the legal code. Which is a slipery slope to violating non flemites. And is not providing equal protection under the law. The law of inclusion - all potential faith groups ought to be recongized or none should be. :/
Click to expand...
Respectfully, I don't think that is the case. I am sure that I am not the only one who believes that while people have the right to worship whoever/whatever they want.. We do not necessarily need to approve all religions being recognised under the legal code. A proven track record of contribution to TNP would be needed for my support.
 
Like real life. I don't feel a 'religious test' or in this case a 'test of cultural contribution' should be nessicary. By the fact of a religion being founded and/or practiced in TNP it gives the region more culture IMO.

And to my dear Flemingovia - No I did not, I had assumed by virtue of it being a church in the region they would welcome equal protection and inclusion like Flemingovianism has enjoyed. Also note this bill would have made Discordian FSM and 13 "A/an" offical recognized church and NOT "The" official church of TNP. That honorable distinction would still be held by Flemingovianism and nothing in this bill would change that. Flemingovianism would still be THE OFFICAL religion of TNP. And other faith groups would just be offically recongized and their right to practice enshrined in the legal code (as Flemingovianism is) but they would not be put on the same pedistol that Flemingovianism resides on.
 
What about a compromise. We vote to add a new religion to the old flem bill that passed instead of writing up new bills every time. So Flem and blah blah religion is recognized blah blah. and so on...
 
PaulWallLibertarian42:
I thought that had already gotten shot down egal. No one wanted to amend or replace the existing bill?
Click to expand...
Id be up for it so we dont clog up the laws sheet with long ass bills of each religion. The Gross compromise was completely different.
 
Well perhaps I should have said section. I don't see how these other religions require official recognition at this time. It is probably too early for them.. given that some have existed for barely a few weeks. Additionally from people I have spoken to, many are very tired of the constant back and forth on religious matters.
 
mcmasterdonia:
Well perhaps I should have said section. I don't see how these other religions require official recognition at this time. It is probably too early for them.. given that some have existed for barely a few weeks. Additionally from people I have spoken to, many are very tired of the constant back and forth on religious matters.
Click to expand...
This is also extremely accurate
 
McM:
Um. I very clearly said that is what I want.
Click to expand...
No duh. But was it necessary to share it? It's called 'passive influence'.

@PWL42: Just go ahead and propose. What's the worst that could happen? It fails? So what? Patience is irrelevant here. I will be opposed to 'state religion' forever. I don't care if everyone buys into it. Don't go looking for approval from people that would throw you under the bus when your usefulness expires. You went out of your way to climb the ladder.. where did that lead? Some newer converts might be wise to take heed. I won't say: "I told you so", but you won't get a shoulder to cry on either. Eyes open.
 
And to my dear Flemingovia - No I did not, I had assumed by virtue of it being a church in the region they would welcome equal protection and inclusion like Flemingovianism has enjoyed.
Click to expand...

"Before you assume you might try this crazy method called "asking""

I cannot remember who said that, but it remains true.
 
I just see it as an opportunity in our laws that should be discussed. It is like lajik's "Christianity" proposal. While he used a religion that was both real life and not currently part of TNP culture I felt the discussion held validity on the points Lajik was trying to make. So I figured I could use religions actually in TNP. As as I said in which IMO I feel contribute to the culture by virtue of being in our beloved region.

Though I understand this is not the most opportune time to discuss this matter as religion recognition talks has left a salty taste in everyones mouth. But I hope you understand it will have to come up sooner or later to adress potential recognition of other groups.

I had hoped maybe this time we could just discuss it amicably and without name calling and people becoming epicly butthurt. - so far I am happy with the level of civility and wish to see it continue.

So far this has been me and a few others doing back and forth. Id wager not even a quarter of the RA has weighed in to say if this is something they could potentially support or not. I would like to wait to see if other RA members would like to comment who have not yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top