[DRAFT] Freedom of Religion

[Imperium Anglorum]

Stop godmodding.

[Caracasus]

Well, we are very confused about the good ambassador Bell's whereabouts at this time. We were hoping to barter some of our office supplies for printer toner. Oh well, to the issue at hand.

5. Requires that member nations refrain from unnecessary entanglement of government and religious functions so as to avoid religious discrimination by government and the appearance of impropriety;

We are confused about this. What would "unnecessary entanglement" entail exactly? Would it be the (nominal) head of state holding the position of defender of the faith for example? Displaying religious artifacts or idols during a national holiday?

We feel that if a nation is subscribing to the other points of this resolution would create a nation with freedom of religion without this part of the legislation. We know of nations with a state religion, where there is entanglement of government and religious functions that have provided a tolerant environment for all to practice their chosen faith. We have also seen examples of nations which have absolutely no involvement in religion at all who have openly prosecuted religious groups. We just do not see why the author has included this section as we feel it is not vital to achieving their laudable aim.

We are also concerned in part about this section, which we feel requires more clarity:

6. Prohibits the resort to religion or spiritual belief to justify harming, injuring, or causing loss to another, and requires that all criminal laws be applied equally, fairly, and without regard to a person's particular religious belief or lack thereof;

We would be concerned that this could cloud some criminal trials. If laws are to be applied equally and fairly as well as without regard to a person's particular religious belief or lack thereof this could create some problems.

As I am sure the good ambassador is aware, most legal systems contain the idea of mitigating/exacerbating circumstances. Thus a person committing an act of vandalism (graffiti) on the side of a bridge would receive a lesser sentence than someone spraying a holy site (a temple perhaps) with anti-religious graffiti. Under this new legislation, where a person's particular religious belief or lack thereof is not to be regarded - would this still be the case? We would just like to see some clarification - perhaps that a person's particular religious belief or lack thereof could not be considered, on its own, as a factor for or against them in a criminal trial.

[Separatist Peoples]

Bell completely ignores the armed men, as the ACME Weapon Nullifiers in the GA building would render their weapons harmless, as they have done for years and years, confident that the building security force would quickly sweep down and take care of the intruders. Indeed, so unconcerned that Security would be their in a second or two, that he completely turned his back on the men to get a better look at the bill in question, "I wonder if the author could answer a minor concern I have? In this clause here:"

3. Further recognizes the right of religious organizations, communities, and churches existing within member nations to proselytize their faith, so long as in doing so they do not resort to intimidation, coercion, or other undue or overbearing influence;

"Would it not be better to add in something like: "subject to the relevant laws of a member state" or "with similar restrictions comparable to alternative advertising" or something like that? I'm concerned that this would, technically, override individuals right to, say, have people not enter their property without permission, as the right to proselytize is technically issued by a superseding power, or to be able to ban religious advertisements in a medium by which non-religious advertisements are already banned, as a nation who bans billboards might be forced to allow religious billboards for the same reason. I feel that the addition of a clause which allows nations to treat different forms of what is essentially advertising the same in terms of rights to property or privacy or in the interest of public benefit would be a reasonable addition."

Behind the ambassador, a small scuffle breaks out as a GA Security team arrives to take care of the looming thugs. Shouldering through, Bell calls out, "I'll be heading over to the Stranger's Bar, of anybody is looking for a drink or some office supplies to barter for!"

[Belivonia]

Belivonia wishes to keep its irreverence to Religion, and to employ a 0% religious parliament, government and teachers while following Freedom of Expression and WA resolutions.