DRAFT: Ban on Burning Crosses

[Absolvability]

"Hr'rmm, is the cross an 'ethnic' symbol in your nation? We are accustomed to thinking of it as a 'religious' symbol, instead..."

"APPALLED at the continuing occurrences of verbal, symbolic and even physical harassments and assaults based on perceived racial differences,

ACKNOWLEDGING that setting crosses on fire is a symbolic gesture that in some cases intends to strike terror at the heart of individuals, families and communities belonging to racial minorities,"

You make a good point, Ambassador, but I don't think it's in complete upkeeping with the proposal as it now stands. The proposal is obviously addressing a racial concern more than a religious one. Perhaps the author isn't aware that all countries don't burn crosses to express a distaste for certain ethnicities.

On a side-note, I'd rather not go down the religious road. That was my response to the comments left by Ambassadors, not to the proposal itself.

[Malikov]

Glen-Rhodes wrote:
The exceptions are for individual member states. Let's leave cross-burning (which has been parts of large festivals in Glen-Rhodes history, celebrating the end of religious corruption in the Federal Parliament) up to those individual member states to decide, then.

Dr. Bradford Castro
Chief Ambassador, FAA
Regional Delegate, Jordia

Cheif Ambassador, and regional delegate, Dr. Castro makes an excellent point. Let the idividual nations create laws governing this topic.

Malikov, Jordia

[Linux and the X]

Allows member states to set reasonable restrictions on expression

Freedom of Expression leaves the question to member states, this is therefore a violation.

[Quintessence of Dust]

I have to confess ignorance as to what cross-burning actually is. It's certainly never happened in our history, leading me to wonder how many other nations would be totally unaffected by this proposal. I'd suggest this proposal is too narrow: if cross-burning is a problem in your nation, the answer is probably to be found in national-level legislation.

-- Dr Joyce Merrywether
WA Ambassador

[Sionis Prioratus]

The broader question are hate crimes. That's what I'm trying to deal with here. I know this is all very incipient, still.

Discrimination is already most excellently dealt with existing legislation. BUT:

Assaulting and injuring anybody is a bad enough thing. But should a criminal who assaults and injures somebody because that person is of a racial minority, [violet]'s worshipper, a [violet] denier, be punished on the same terms as somebody who did not perform such a criminal act (edit: based on prejudice)? Shouldn't they be subject to harsher penalties by default upon proven guilty?

Hate crimes legislation does not automatically flow from freedom from discrimination.

A question.

[Flibbleites]

Would this mean that if someone were to burn down a church we'd have to charge them with both arson and cross desecration?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Sionis Prioratus]

Would this mean that if someone were to burn down a church we'd have to charge them with both arson and cross desecration?

Hon. Amb. Bob Flibble, the issue at hand is not "cross desecration"; is about burning a cross with the intent to intimidate/traumatize a minority.

OOC: Has nobody ever heard of the KKK? And NS has plenty of Nazis.

[Bavin]

Um, how can the worlds largest religion be a religious minority? Christianity is not only the least persecuted religion its also the most persecuting

[Aundotutunagir]

Hiriaurtung Arororugul addresses the General Assembly dressed head to toe in a white robe and a pointy white hat. He is flanked on both sides by burning crosses and Aundotutunagirian flags. The heat from the burning crosses causes the flags to flap and sway. A juaunty military march plays in the background.

The People of Aundotutunagir oppose this! For years the burning of crosses has been used to commemorate our victory over the hated Swedes (who were Christians). Likewise, the costume I am wearing is in remembrance of the crude camouflage fashioned by our troops during the long and gruelling winter campaigns of that war.

[Absolvability]

Assaulting and injuring anybody is a bad enough thing. But should a criminal who assaults and injures somebody because that person is of a racial minority, [violet]'s worshipper, a [violet] denier, be punished on the same terms as somebody who did not perform such a criminal act (edit: based on prejudice)? Shouldn't they be subject to harsher penalties by default upon proven guilty?

I'm not sure where you got that from... I didn't understand your allusions. As per the question... no, I don't think they should be subject to harsher penalties. Not beyond the extent that a hate-crime can always be considered pre-meditated, I think, and therefore would merit Murder in the first degree. Other than that... in nations that have such options... I don't think any one crime is worse than another. Hating individuals isn't a lot better than hating groups.

[Blasted Pirates]

We believe this to be illegal on the grounds on contravening the Freedom of Expression Act where it states that individual nations decide what else is not eligible for expression.

How are we to decide what is meant to be derrogatory and what is meant to be ceremonial? This is a bad idea and should be dropped all together.

[Urgench]

This resolution is utter stupidity. it presumes that the burning of crosses has anything to do with racism and makes the fatuous presumption that all races in all nations have a similar understanding of symbolism.

Why waste this organisation's time with this tripe, when the real causes of racism remain untouched, how many people will this actually prevent the harrowing of social exclusion associated with racism ? None.


Yours,

[Rutianas]

Um, how can the worlds largest religion be a religious minority? Christianity is not only the least persecuted religion its also the most persecuting

Depends on what 'world' you're on. On the planetary systems of the Republic, Christianity is a clear religious minority. They account for maybe 5% of the population.

We did have issues with cross burning until we passed our own laws that made it illegal if used as part of a hate crime. Fortunately, we don't have issues with it now since we seem to have grown beyond religious intolerance. This would be a good first step in helping other nations who suffer from religious intolerance. I do agree that perhaps it should be renamed and include other religious symbols as well.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

[Blasted Pirates]

Would this mean that if someone were to burn down a church we'd have to charge them with both arson and cross desecration?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

What if it were an act of a god? Would this god person be made to stand trial?

[Gaytania]

This proposed resolution concerns me that the World Assembly would be overstepping the boundary of national sovereignty by passing this resolution. Some member nations have laws that protect the freedom to assemble and the freedom of speech. The wording of this proposal does not accurately clarify the separation between the power of the World Assembly and the power of individual member nations and their respective regions. I would like to suggest that this proposal to be revised and rewritten to differentiate between freedoms of private individuals and the freedoms of the government and business orginizations.

Therefore until this proposal is revised and rewritten the World Assembly Ambassador of Gaytania
opposes this resolution to outlaw the burning of crosses. (Another suggestion is that your next proposal should recognize religious symbols as a whole and not just the symbol of one religion).

[The Altan Steppes]

We are opposed to this as well. The focus on crosses is entirely too narrow in scope. We frankly think that the matter of desecration of religious symbols is best left to national legislation, but if we must go there, perhaps we could focus on more than crosses?

It may also be desirable to approach this from a different way, by separating the desecration of religious symbols (i.e. cross-burning) from the issue of intimidation of minorities entirely, and perhaps considering separate pieces of legislation for such issues.

-Jaris Krytellin, Ambassador

[Brutland and Norden]

What's with a burning cross?

Reply from the Nord-Brutlandese Foreign Ministry to the Permanent Nord-Brutlandese Mission to the Words Assembly

OOC: Has nobody ever heard of the KKK? And NS has plenty of Nazis.

OOC: Oh yes we do. But not every player is in America. And not every NS nation has the KK and Nazis. One tip, never mix RL with IC.

[Philimbesi]

While we honor the intent of the resolution we must object as it contradicts the freedom of expression legislation already on the books.

While it certainly is not good taste to do so, and while the underlying causes of such activity should be addressed, the bottom line is we believe it is a citizens right to express themselves.

[Linux and the X]

2) Such a despicable act shall be made criminal by all the member states.

ACK PHTBT!
You actually want us to lock people up merely for burning their own property? This is absolutely unacceptable!