The North Pacific Religious Reform Act

Iraelia

TNPer
I propose the following changes to the legal code:
Religious Reform Act:
Section 10.3 of The North Pacific, entitled Religious Observance, as written below is hereby repealed:
Legal Code:
Section 10.3: Religious Observance
15. Flemingovianism shall be adopted as the religion and church of The North Pacific.
16. All nations are guaranteed freedom of expression of all, any, or no religious belief, and that freedom shall not be curtailed.
17. The Flemingovian religion shall receive no financial or tax advantages through being the religion of The North Pacific.
18. Holidays of the Flemingovian 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.
19. No nation shall serve on the cabinet or any other appointed government position by virtue of their status in the Flemingovian religion.
20. Flemingovian officials may participate, as invited by the delegate, at all state functions.
 
JayDee:
umm...why?
It alienates people who are not Flemingovians, and causes a church that is not separate from the state. My nation, for example, follows Iraelianism. I do recognize that we are granted the Freedom to or from religion, but if The North Pacific is truly welcoming to all religious peoples, it will not advocate for an official religion. If this was meant to honor Flemingovia, we can find a better way to do so. But creating a regional religion centered around them is not the way.
 
Okay so there's an official religion for the region. I know other regions that have this exact same thing. If it inhibited on my ability to succeed in the region, I would support. From my view, that doesn't seem to be the case. If it becomes evident people are ignoring this, I might approve, but for now, it's no.
 
JayDee:
Okay so there's an official religion for the region. I know other regions that have this exact same thing. If it inhibited on my ability to succeed in the region, I would support. From my view, that doesn't seem to be the case. If it becomes evident people are ignoring this, I might approve, but for now, it's no.
I understand. This bill is mostly a symbolic gesture to show that The North Pacific is a secular region.
 
JayDee:
But TNP is clearly not a religiously secular region.
I don't understand your point. There are many different religions that have spread into nations in the North Pacific, and so the religious diversity is quite large. If we reform our legal system, we establish a secular government that takes no one side in religion. If your point was that under current law, TNP isn't secular, then I agree. that's why I proposed this bill.
 
What I don't understand is your point. You're trying to force an ideology on TNP that it clearly does not want. Long ago, people decided to accept this religion as a regional religion, establishing TNP as a non-secular region. This is not just an amendment, but the forceful changing of an established ideology.
 
JayDee:
What I don't understand is your point. You're trying to force an ideology on TNP that it clearly does not want. Long ago, people decided to accept this religion as a regional religion, establishing TNP as a non-secular region. This is not just an amendment, but the forceful changing of an established ideology.
It isn't an enforcement of any ideology! It simply rescinds the current SPECIAL status of Flemingovianism as the Regional Religion. I'm not saying we should adopt Secularism in this region, I'm just saying that the Region will not be in the business of any one religion. How is that in any way forcing an Ideology upon anyone? And just because people accepted it long ago doesn't mean we can't change it. Long ago, Rape of captured civilians was considered okay. Guess what? Times Change! And with the changing times we must adjust our stances and be more tolerant of other religions. By passing this bill, we symbolic do this.
 
Recognition of a regional religion is not inherently harmful in any way. They still allow for the freedom of worship of any religion, while observing the Holidays of this religion on a regional scale. You're right, times change, but this is not a time of change. Forced change will get us no where.
 
This bill will most likely not pass. Joke or not, Flemingovianism has been a part of our region's history for quite a while, and I don't think too many people care enough against that to support this bill. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but those are my thoughts.
 
Bootsie:
This bill will most likely not pass. Joke or not, Flemingovianism has been a part of our region's history for quite a while, and I don't think too many people care enough against that to support this bill. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but those are my thoughts.
I understand, but there must be a better way to show the cultural impact of Flemingovianism while also remaining secular.
 
JayDee:
Recognition of a regional religion is not inherently harmful in any way. They still allow for the freedom of worship of any religion, while observing the Holidays of this religion on a regional scale. You're right, times change, but this is not a time of change. Forced change will get us no where.
What forceful actions does this bill endorse?
 
I am not going through this again. Last time was almost enough to end my time on nationstates and the way I have been feeling lately another round will provably seal the deal. Do whatever you want.
 
JayDee:
You're trying to force people to recognize that Flembigrova-whatever is no longer the regional religion
No, the government would no longer endorse a specific religion. If anyone wants to spiritually recognize Flemingovia as the de facto religion of the Region, they can. We aren't stopping them from doing so. All we would do is withdraw an endorsement.
 
flemingovia:
I am not going through this again. Last time was almost enough to end my time on nationstates and the way I have been feeling lately another round will provably seal the deal. Do whatever you want.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend you... Are you okay?
 
I am not interested in removing flemingovianism as the official religion. I also fail to see any part of the quoted law that indicates intolerance of any religion.

As a side note, Iraelia, I strongly urge you to reconsider comparing the adoption of an official religion in an internet game with rape. It's inaccurate, harmful, and highly inappropriate.
 
SillyString:
I am not interested in removing flemingovianism as the official religion. I also fail to see any part of the quoted law that indicates intolerance of any religion.

As a side note, Iraelia, I strongly urge you to reconsider comparing the adoption of an official religion in an internet game with rape. It's inaccurate, harmful, and highly inappropriate.
I am sorry for that statement. I was trying to think of an example quickly and that was the first thing that came to my mind. I will avoid such brash statements in the future. Yes, the legal code does not show any intolerance for other religions. What I am arguing for is a withdrawal of our endorsement of Flemingovianism. It's a symbolic gesture to show that TNP is secular.
 
Ok so one of these bills gets proposed every few years, they never pass.

Flemingovianism has been the official religion of our region for a long time. This is supported by quite a few players who have sharp political differences with flem.

The status of flemingovianism as our official religion is an important part of our culture and history. Repealing it is simply taking that away from us.
 
Okay, one comment.

When Flemingovianism was adopted over five years ago, it was after considerable argument - some of the most vicious and personal i have known in all my years in TNP. Dire predictions were made about the effect it would have on the Region, up to and including that it would cause the eventual demise of TNP, persecution and the rise of a dictatorship with me as overlord.

None of that has happened, of course. Nobody has been in the slightest bit discriminated against, persecuted or even inconvenienced. On the contrary, it has proved to be one of the richest seams in our cultural life. Several times it has enriched out own regional roleplay (noticeably in 2014), given us the Fiqh, and has probably been the primary TNP cultural export to other regions, since several other regions have adopted Flemingovianism.

But I will tell you what, Iraelia, I will set you a challenge. Search the regional archives. Do a bit of research. If you can find a single instance - one - where any individual has been discriminated against or prejudiced against or overlooked because of this clause, i will personally propose a repeal.
 
I have been a devout Flemingovian for years, my wife (McMasterdonia) and I have raised our children (Kylesburgh, Kialga, Plembobria and Romic) according to its values and even founded a Kingdom, (Alexandria) to spread the word of Flemingovia to the four corners of (our fictional) world.

This bill, is heresy. This author, a heretic. I demand an inquisition!

(To clarify, I'm taking the piss)
 
Lord Ravenclaw:
I have been a devout Flemingovian for years, my wife (McMasterdonia) and I have raised our children (Kylesburgh, Kialga, Plembobria and Romic) according to its values and even founded a Kingdom, (Alexandria) to spread the word of Flemingovia to the four corners of (our fictional) world.

This bill, is heresy. This author, a heretic. I demand an inquisition!

(To clarify, I'm taking the piss)
Understood. I feel I have made a mistake in proposing this bill. It is quite clear the region's feelings on this. Shall I move for a vote?
 
flemingovia:
Okay, one comment.

When Flemingovianism was adopted over five years ago, it was after considerable argument - some of the most vicious and personal i have known in all my years in TNP. Dire predictions were made about the effect it would have on the Region, up to and including that it would cause the eventual demise of TNP, persecution and the rise of a dictatorship with me as overlord.

None of that has happened, of course. Nobody has been in the slightest bit discriminated against, persecuted or even inconvenienced. On the contrary, it has proved to be one of the richest seams in our cultural life. Several times it has enriched out own regional roleplay (noticeably in 2014), given us the Fiqh, and has probably been the primary TNP cultural export to other regions, since several other regions have adopted Flemingovianism.

But I will tell you what, Iraelia, I will set you a challenge. Search the regional archives. Do a bit of research. If you can find a single instance - one - where any individual has been discriminated against or prejudiced against or overlooked because of this clause, i will personally propose a repeal.
I am sorry, I didn't know this had personally effected you on such a level. I never claimed people were persecuted, I just thought it would be nice to have a secular region. But seeing as how it has been so important to the culture of this region, I don't think I can consciously support my own proposal. I'm sorry for any pain I have caused you.
 
What.

I actually don't understand. What is this bill meant to do. The region's religion has affected nothing and has discriminated against nobody. No need to go through this.
 
Iraelia:
[...]

Understood. I feel I have made a mistake in proposing this bill. It is quite clear the region's feelings on this. Shall I move for a vote?
Iraelia:
[...]

I am sorry, I didn't know this had personally effected you on such a level. I never claimed people were persecuted, I just thought it would be nice to have a secular region. But seeing as how it has been so important to the culture of this region, I don't think I can consciously support my own proposal. I'm sorry for any pain I have caused you.
If the proposer could clarify, as there are quite mixed views expressed in these posts, is it intended that the Bill be considered withdrawn or for debate to continue? If the proposer wishes to continue with the Bill, I would suggest waiting a few days more before moving to vote, as it has so far been less than a day since it was proposed and as the state religion is quite a significant matter.
 
Zyvetskistaahn:
Iraelia:
[...]

Understood. I feel I have made a mistake in proposing this bill. It is quite clear the region's feelings on this. Shall I move for a vote?
Iraelia:
[...]

I am sorry, I didn't know this had personally effected you on such a level. I never claimed people were persecuted, I just thought it would be nice to have a secular region. But seeing as how it has been so important to the culture of this region, I don't think I can consciously support my own proposal. I'm sorry for any pain I have caused you.
If the proposer could clarify, as there are quite mixed views expressed in these posts, is it intended that the Bill be considered withdrawn or for debate to continue? If the proposer wishes to continue with the Bill, I would suggest waiting a few days more before moving to vote, as it has so far been less than a day since it was proposed and as the state religion is quite a significant matter.
The Bill should be considered withdrawn
 
Back
Top