Page 1 of 6

[PASSED] Protection of Apostates

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2021 4:23 pm
by Daarwyrth
CURRENT DRAFT:
Protection of Apostates
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant



Cognizant of its commitment to grant all inhabitants of member nations the right to practice their religion freely and in peace, and in a manner that is in agreement with their conscience, and their religion's teachings; yet

Equally committed to ensuring that the safety and wellbeing of apostates are secured, and similarly protected by the wings of World Assembly law;

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:

    1. 'apostate' as any natural person who has formally renounced their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    2. 'apostasy' as the act of a natural person freely and consciously, formally renouncing their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    3. 'religious leadership' as any individual, group or entity that has a leadership function within a religion, religious institution, or any other organised belief-system;

  2. Requires that member states treat apostasy as a legal act within their national jurisdictions;

  3. Acknowledges the right of apostates and people considering apostasy not to be subjected to any form of punishment, reprisal, persecution, or humiliation, as a result of their apostasy or their contemplation of this change, whether by religious leaderships or by individual or grouped members of a religion or organised belief-system, beyond those forms of treatment that would also be legal if carried out for reasons other than religiously-motivated ones;

  4. Clarifies that, as far as earlier General Assembly resolutions that are presently in force allow, religious institutions are still allowed to bar apostates from employment in their service in roles for which faith can reasonably be considered relevant, such as priesthood or teaching about religious matters, and from access to their places of worship (except as necessary for the proper performance of legitimate tasks such as by emergency services, official safety inspectorates, or armed forces, and except for any parts of those premises that are being used at the time for significant secular purposes, for example as polling stations or as emergency shelters) or participation in their religious & church-organised social activities;

  5. Decrees that the process of apostasy must not be unduly restricted, or obstructed by onerous bureaucracy, or force individuals to pass through discouraging or humiliating practices in order to enact it;

  6. Mandates that member nations recognise the right of apostates, and individuals contemplating apostasy, to keep the reasoning behind their decision to commit apostasy private;

  7. Clarifies that religious leaderships, or individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, are permitted to attempt to convince those contemplating apostasy, or apostates themselves, to remain faithful through reasonable conversation and debate;

  8. Specifies that a refusal to partake in a conversation or debate as per Clause 7, by either an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, shall not have any consequences to the detriment of that apostate or individual;

  9. Requires that member states enforce the articles of this resolution in a manner that entices compliance, or that inspires deterrence regarding non-compliance with the content of this legislation.

Co-authored with Bears Armed Mission.


OOC: After a period of drafting this resolution proposal on the Forest offsite forums, I have decided to move it to drafting here as well. Your feedback and thoughts are most welcome!

One of the critiques that I expect on this draft is GAR #430 “Freedom of Religion”, and that this proposal draft might duplicate it. Yet GAR #430 states in Clause 2 “without fear of state punishment, reprisal, or persecution”. The words “state punishment, reprisal, or persecution” are repeated throughout all clauses, but the resolution doesn’t speak about reprisals, punishment or persecution from non-state actors, such as the leadership of a religion or religious group. This resolution targets those, and as such, doesn’t duplicate “Freedom of Religion” or contradict it, in my opinion. There is precedent for the World Assembly regulating non-state actors, namely in my old friend GAR #527 "Protected Working Leave" Clause 3, which forbids "employers from discriminating or retaliating against workers for requesting or taking paid leave pursuant to section 2 of this resolution; such retaliation including".

After significant contributions to the improvement of this draft, Bears Armed has become a co-author of this resolution under the nation Bears Armed Mission.

DRAFT 3:
Protection of Apostates
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant



Cognizant of its commitment to grant all inhabitants of member nations the right to practice their religion freely and in peace, and in a manner that is in agreement with their conscience, and their religion's teachings; yet

Equally committed to ensuring that the safety and wellbeing of apostates are secured, and similarly protected by the wings of World Assembly law;

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:

    1. 'apostate' as any natural person who has formally renounced their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    2. 'apostasy' as the act of a natural person freely and consciously, formally renouncing their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    3. 'religious leadership' as any individual, group or entity that has a leadership function within a religion, religious institution, or any other organised belief-system;

  2. Requires that member states treat apostasy as a legal act within their national jurisdictions;

  3. Acknowledges the right of apostates and people considering apostasy not to be subjected to any form of punishment, reprisal, persecution, or humiliation, as a result of their apostasy or their contemplation of this change, whether by religious leaderships or by individual or grouped members of a religion or organised belief-system, beyond those forms of treatment that would also be legal if carried out for reasons other than religiously-motivated ones;

  4. Clarifies that, as far as earlier resolutions that are presently in force allow, religious institutions are still allowed to bar apostates from employment in their service or access to their premises (except for any parts of those premises that are being used at the time for significant secular purposes, for example as polling stations or as emergency shelters) or participation in their religious & social activities;

  5. Decrees that the process of apostasy must not be unduly restricted, or obstructed by onerous bureaucracy, or force individuals to pass through discouraging or humiliating practices in order to enact it;

  6. Recognises that apostates, and individuals contemplating apostasy, have the right to privacy regarding the reasoning behind their decision to commit apostasy;

  7. Clarifies that religious leaderships, or individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, are permitted to attempt to convince those contemplating apostasy, or apostates themselves, to remain faithful through reasonable conversation and debate;

  8. Specifies that Clause 7 may only be enacted when an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, has freely and consciously given their consent to such;

  9. Requires that member states enforce the articles of this resolution in a manner that entices compliance, or that inspires deterrence regarding non-compliance with the content of this legislation.

Co-authored with Bears Armed Mission.


DRAFT 2:
Protecting Apostates
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant



Cognizant of its commitment to grant all inhabitants of member nations the right to practice their religion freely and in peace, and in a manner that is in agreement with their conscience, and their religion's teachings; yet

Equally committed to ensuring that the safety and wellbeing of apostates are secured, and similarly protected by the wings of World Assembly law;

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:

    1. 'apostate' as any natural person who has formally renounced their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    2. 'apostasy' as the act of a natural person freely and consciously, formally renouncing their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    3. 'religious leadership' as any individual, group or entity that has a leadership function within a religion, religious institution, or any other organised belief-system;

  2. Acknowledges the right of apostates and people considering apostasy not to be subjected to any form of punishment, reprisal, persecution, or humiliation, as a result of their apostasy or their contemplation of this change, whether by religious leaderships or by individual or grouped members of a religion or organised belief-system, beyond those forms of treatment that would also be legal if carried out for reasons other than religiously-motivated ones;

  3. Clarifies that, as far as earlier resolutions that are presently in force allow, religious institutions are still allowed to bar apostates from employment in their service or access to their premises (except for any parts of those premises that are being used at the time for significant 'secular' purposes, for example as polling stations or as emergency shelters) or participation in their religious & social activities;

  4. Decrees that the process of apostasy must not be unduly restricted, or obstructed by onerous bureaucracy, or force individuals to pass through discouraging or humiliating practices in order to enact it;

  5. Recognises that apostates, and individuals contemplating apostasy, have the right to privacy regarding the reasoning behind their decision to commit apostasy;

  6. Clarifies that religious leaderships, or individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, are permitted to attempt to convince those contemplating apostasy, or apostates themselves, to remain faithful through reasonable conversation and debate;

  7. Specifies that Clause 6 may only be enacted when an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, has freely and consciously given their consent to such;

  8. Requires that member states enforce the articles of this resolution in a manner that entices compliance, or that inspires deterrence regarding non-compliance with the content of this legislation.


DRAFT 1:
Protecting Apostates
Category: Moral Decency | Strength: Significant



Cognizant of its commitment to grant all inhabitants of member nations the right to practice their religion freely and in peace, and in a manner that is in agreement with their conscience, and their religion's teachings; yet

Equally committed to ensuring that the safety and wellbeing of apostates are secured, and similarly protected by the wings of World Assembly law;

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:

    1. 'apostate' as any natural person who has formally renounced their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    2. 'apostasy' as the act of a natural person freely and consciously, formally renouncing their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    3. 'religious leadership' as any individual, group or entity that has a leadership function within a religion, religious institution, or any other organised belief-system;

  2. Requires religious leaderships to have a system established within their religious institution, group or organised belief system that allows their members to commit apostasy;

  3. Forbids religious leaderships, or the individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, from submitting an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, to any form of punishment, reprisal, persecution or humiliation as a result of their apostasy, or their contemplation of such;

  4. Demands that the process of apostasy will not be unduly restricted, or obstructed by onerous bureaucracy, or force individuals to pass through discouraging or humiliating practices to enact it;

  5. Grants apostates, or individuals contemplating apostasy, the right to privacy regarding the reasoning behind their decision to commit apostasy;

  6. Clarifies that religious leaderships, or individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, are permitted to attempt to convince those contemplating apostasy, or apostates themselves, to remain faithful through reasonable conversation and debate;

  7. Specifies that Clause 6 may only be enacted when an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, has freely and consciously given their consent to such;

  8. Requires member states to enforce the articles of this resolution in a manner that entices compliance, or that inspires deterrence regarding non-compliance with the content of this legislation.

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2021 4:42 pm
by Tinhampton
Euan Barnes, former Mayor of Tinhampton (1989-95): I am not Representative vyn Nysen - in fact, I'm not even a member of Tinhampton's World Assembly delegation, Lydia Anderson just asked me to visit for a weekend or two - but were I her, I'd scratch the first seven articles and replace them with something along the lines of "forbids religious organisations and their leaders from enacting any punishment against any person simply because that person has left their religious organisation, and from unduly restricting the ability of any person to so leave."
Mrs Anderson and Delegate-Ambassador Alexander Smith have both reliably informed me that they support your current proposal which contains eight articles as it stands, however. I, too, must congratulate your effort here.

OOC: The sole operative clause of HR#172 "Help Prevent Ozone Depletion" made no mention of member states whatsoever; it merely required that "all businesses must reduce emitions of CFCs by 50% within five years and 90% within thirty years" - although I am not sure how a similar approach would cope in the face of the 2016-era Committee rule's expectation that resolutions "must affect member states in some fashion."

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2021 4:47 pm
by Jedinsto
"I disagree with the Mayor of Tinhampton that the first 7 articles should be scrapped. Condensed, maybe. Scrapped no. All the mandates are still contributing something of value to the resolution."

Edit: OOC: Support. Also, I like the short preamble quite a bit.

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2021 4:52 pm
by Daarwyrth
Tinhampton wrote:Euan Barnes, former Mayor of Tinhampton (1989-95): I am not Representative vyn Nysen - in fact, I'm not even a member of Tinhampton's World Assembly delegation, Lydia Anderson just asked me to visit for a weekend or two - but were I her, I'd scratch the first seven articles and replace them with something along the lines of "forbids religious organisations and their leaders from enacting any punishment against any person simply because that person has left their religious organisation, and from unduly restricting the ability of any person to so leave."
Mrs Anderson and Delegate-Ambassador Alexander Smith have both reliably informed me that they support your current proposal which contains eight articles as it stands, however. I, too, must congratulate your effort here.

Dame Maria vyn Nysen: "Mister Barnes, it is a pleasure to make your acquaintance. We thank you for your approval, and will take your suggestion into consideration to significantly cut the amount of clauses that this draft has. Our delegation has a natural tendency to be wordy in such affairs, yet perhaps that can be part of our own unique flavour in the World Assembly? A thought to consider, but one that I won't bother you with further. Your commentary is most appreciated."

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2021 4:53 pm
by Apostate
Daarwyrth wrote:
Protecting Apostates
Category: Moral Decency | Strength: Significant



Cognizant of its commitment to grant all inhabitants of member nations the right to practice their religion freely and in peace, and in a manner that is in agreement with their conscience, and their religion's teachings; yet

Equally committed to ensuring that the safety and wellbeing of apostates are secured, and similarly protected by the wings of World Assembly law;

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:

    1. 'apostate' as any natural person who has formally renounced their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    2. 'apostasy' as the act of a natural person freely and consciously, formally renouncing their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    3. 'religious leadership' as any individual, group or entity that has a leadership function within a religion, religious institution, or any other organised belief-system;

  2. Requires religious leaderships to have a system established within their religious institution, group or organised belief system that allows their members to commit apostasy;

  3. Forbids religious leaderships, or the individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, from submitting an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, to any form of punishment, reprisal, persecution or humiliation as a result of their apostasy, or their contemplation of such;

  4. Demands that the process of apostasy will not be unduly restricted, or obstructed by onerous bureaucracy, or force individuals to pass through discouraging or humiliating practices to enact it;

  5. Grants apostates, or individuals contemplating apostasy, the right to privacy regarding the reasoning behind their decision to commit apostasy;

  6. Clarifies that religious leaderships, or individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, are permitted to attempt to convince those contemplating apostasy, or apostates themselves, to remain faithful through reasonable conversation and debate;

  7. Specifies that Clause 6 may only be enacted when an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, has freely and consciously given their consent to such;

  8. Requires member states to enforce the articles of this resolution in a manner that entices compliance, or that inspires deterrence regarding non-compliance with the content of this legislation.


OOC: After a period of drafting this resolution proposal on the Forest offsite forums, I have decided to move it to drafting here as well. Your feedback and thoughts are most welcome!

One of the critiques that I expect on this draft is GAR #430 “Freedom of Religion”, and that this proposal draft might duplicate it. Yet GAR #430 states in Clause 2 “without fear of state punishment, reprisal, or persecution”. The words “state punishment, reprisal, or persecution” are repeated throughout all clauses, but the resolution doesn’t speak about reprisals, punishment or persecution from non-state actors, such as the leadership of a religion or religious group. This resolution targets those, and as such, doesn’t duplicate “Freedom of Religion” or contradict it, in my opinion. There is precedent for the World Assembly regulating non-state actors, namely in my old friend GAR #527 "Protected Working Leave" Clause 3, which forbids "employers from discriminating or retaliating against workers for requesting or taking paid leave pursuant to section 2 of this resolution; such retaliation including".


I think this is a great proposal. Well done.

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2021 4:55 pm
by Affray
Apostate wrote:
Daarwyrth wrote:
Protecting Apostates
Category: Moral Decency | Strength: Significant



Cognizant of its commitment to grant all inhabitants of member nations the right to practice their religion freely and in peace, and in a manner that is in agreement with their conscience, and their religion's teachings; yet

Equally committed to ensuring that the safety and wellbeing of apostates are secured, and similarly protected by the wings of World Assembly law;

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:

    1. 'apostate' as any natural person who has formally renounced their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    2. 'apostasy' as the act of a natural person freely and consciously, formally renouncing their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    3. 'religious leadership' as any individual, group or entity that has a leadership function within a religion, religious institution, or any other organised belief-system;

  2. Requires religious leaderships to have a system established within their religious institution, group or organised belief system that allows their members to commit apostasy;

  3. Forbids religious leaderships, or the individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, from submitting an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, to any form of punishment, reprisal, persecution or humiliation as a result of their apostasy, or their contemplation of such;

  4. Demands that the process of apostasy will not be unduly restricted, or obstructed by onerous bureaucracy, or force individuals to pass through discouraging or humiliating practices to enact it;

  5. Grants apostates, or individuals contemplating apostasy, the right to privacy regarding the reasoning behind their decision to commit apostasy;

  6. Clarifies that religious leaderships, or individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, are permitted to attempt to convince those contemplating apostasy, or apostates themselves, to remain faithful through reasonable conversation and debate;

  7. Specifies that Clause 6 may only be enacted when an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, has freely and consciously given their consent to such;

  8. Requires member states to enforce the articles of this resolution in a manner that entices compliance, or that inspires deterrence regarding non-compliance with the content of this legislation.


OOC: After a period of drafting this resolution proposal on the Forest offsite forums, I have decided to move it to drafting here as well. Your feedback and thoughts are most welcome!

One of the critiques that I expect on this draft is GAR #430 “Freedom of Religion”, and that this proposal draft might duplicate it. Yet GAR #430 states in Clause 2 “without fear of state punishment, reprisal, or persecution”. The words “state punishment, reprisal, or persecution” are repeated throughout all clauses, but the resolution doesn’t speak about reprisals, punishment or persecution from non-state actors, such as the leadership of a religion or religious group. This resolution targets those, and as such, doesn’t duplicate “Freedom of Religion” or contradict it, in my opinion. There is precedent for the World Assembly regulating non-state actors, namely in my old friend GAR #527 "Protected Working Leave" Clause 3, which forbids "employers from discriminating or retaliating against workers for requesting or taking paid leave pursuant to section 2 of this resolution; such retaliation including".


I think this is a great proposal. Well done.


Great job, Apo! Hopefully you'll be protected soon. :hug:

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2021 4:56 pm
by Daarwyrth
Jedinsto wrote:"I disagree with the Mayor of Tinhampton that the first 7 articles should be scrapped. Condensed, maybe. Scrapped no. All the mandates are still contributing something of value to the resolution."

Vyn Nysen: "Thank you, Ambassador. Our delegation will have a close look at the wording when we start working on the second version for this draft proposal, and try to find ways to condense the language."

Apostate wrote:I think this is a great proposal. Well done.

OOC: Thanks! I appreciate it, especially considering your nation's name ;)

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 12:26 am
by The New Bluestocking Homeland
"A good looking draft, Dame vyn Nysen. Such protections seem sorely needed. While I agree that some condensing of language may be beneficial, this delegation is already strongly leaning towards voting for it."

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 1:44 am
by Bears Armed
OOC: It's well-written, I support it OOC, and the Bears will support it IC as well... although clause 2 would effectively bar mainstream Muslim religious organisations from operating in member nations, because the concept of "once a Muslim, always a Muslim" is a part of Islam's fundamental doctrines and so you would be requiring those organisations to facilitate a major sin. ( I think that it might even be stated, explicitly, in the Koran...)

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 2:32 am
by Daarwyrth
Bears Armed wrote:OOC: It's well-written, I support it OOC, and the Bears will support it IC as well... although clause 2 would effectively bar mainstream Muslim religious organisations from operating in member nations, because the concept of "once a Muslim, always a Muslim" is a part of Islam's fundamental doctrines and so you would be requiring those organisations to facilitate a major sin. ( I think that it might even be stated, explicitly, in the Koran...)

OOC: I honestly had no idea. Do you think I should include a provision or exclusion for that? I feel that would kind of defeat the purpose of this resolution, namely to give all faithful the option to renounce faith, which should be an equal right for all. I guess Clause 2 could be removed if it is a major problem.

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 2:55 am
by Bears Armed
Daarwyrth wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:OOC: It's well-written, I support it OOC, and the Bears will support it IC as well... although clause 2 would effectively bar mainstream Muslim religious organisations from operating in member nations, because the concept of "once a Muslim, always a Muslim" is a part of Islam's fundamental doctrines and so you would be requiring those organisations to facilitate a major sin. ( I think that it might even be stated, explicitly, in the Koran...)

OOC: I honestly had no idea. Do you think I should include a provision or exclusion for that? I feel that would kind of defeat the purpose of this resolution, namely to give all faithful the option to renounce faith, which should be an equal right for all. I guess Clause 2 could be removed if it is a major problem.

OOC: If you grant an explicit exception to this clause for cases where such doctrines would apply then some nations will probably start saying that other aspects of how they [mis]treat apostates are also matters of fundamental doctrine, and demanding exceptions for those as well. I'd just drop this clause... but maybe add one requiring that apostasy be recognised as legal within all member nations? (That latter point might already be covered by existing legislation, I forget, but better safe than sorry...)
Perhaps, also, clarify that -- within any limits set by earlier resolutions that are still in force -- religious organisations legally can exclude apostates from their premises & their employ?

EDIT: Also, this would probably be easier to pass as '|Civil Rights', with slight rewording so that all of its operative clauses actually say that they are giving the apostates freedom for/from the various possible problems rather than say that they are banning the religious organisations from causing those problems, rather than as 'Moral Decency'.

FOR EXAMPLE:

Protecting Apostates
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant



Cognizant of its commitment to grant all inhabitants of member nations the right to practice their religion freely and in peace, and in a manner that is in agreement with their conscience, and their religion's teachings; yet

Equally committed to ensuring that the safety and wellbeing of apostates are secured, and similarly protected by the wings of World Assembly law;

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:

    1. 'apostate' as any natural person who has formally renounced their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    2. 'apostasy' as the act of a natural person freely and consciously, formally renouncing their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    3. 'religious leadership' as any individual, group or entity that has a leadership function within a religion, religious institution, or any other organised belief-system;

  2. Acknowledges the right of apostates and people considering apostasy not to be subjected to any form of punishment, reprisal, persecution, or humiliation, as a result of their apostasy or their contemplation of this change, whether by religious leaderships or by individual or grouped members of a religion or organised belief-system, beyond those forms of treatment that would also be legal if carried out for reasons other than religiously-motivated ones;

  3. Clarifies that, as far as earlier resolutions that are still force allow, religious institutions are still allowed to bar apostates from employment in their service or access to their premises (except for any parts of those premises that are being used at the time for significant 'secular' purposes, for example as polling stations or as emergency shelters) or participation in their religious & social activities;

  4. Decrees that the process of apostasy must not be unduly restricted, or obstructed by onerous bureaucracy, or force individuals to pass through discouraging or humiliating practices in order to enact it;

  5. Recognises that apostates, and individuals contemplating apostasy, have the right to privacy regarding the reasoning behind their decision to commit apostasy;

  6. Clarifies that religious leaderships, or individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, are permitted to attempt to convince those contemplating apostasy, or apostates themselves, to remain faithful through reasonable conversation and debate;

  7. Specifies that Clause 6 may only be enacted when an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, has freely and consciously given their consent to such;

  8. Requires that member states enforce the articles of this resolution in a manner that entices compliance, or that inspires deterrence regarding non-compliance with the content of this legislation.



PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 3:19 am
by Uan aa Boa
As I said in discussions in Forest and now share here for a wider audience, it is to be hoped that in reasonable nations there will already be laws on assault, harassment and other severe forms of reprisal not because of specific protection for apostates but simply because citizens are not able to treat each other that way. Nonetheless, where this proposal bans anything new it will be the case that there are reprisals that a secular organisation can take against former members without breaking the law that will be illegal for religious organisations. That is discrimination in law on the basis of religion and it certainly infringes the spirit, if not the letter, of GA #430.

It's also important to consider what is meant by punishment, persecution, reprisal and humiliation. When a congregation shuns a former member and will not speak to or associate with them this is clearly a very unpleasant experience, especially if most people in the community are part of the congregation. Yet because individuals must be free to associate or not associate with others as they choose I don't see how you can ban this practice without fundamentally compromising freedom of association, or how that would avoid making a criminal of a person who ends a friendship with someone because they no longer share their religion.

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 4:18 am
by Bears Armed
Uan aa Boa wrote:As I said in discussions in Forest and now share here for a wider audience, it is to be hoped that in reasonable nations there will already be laws on assault, harassment and other severe forms of reprisal not because of specific protection for apostates but simply because citizens are not able to treat each other that way. Nonetheless, where this proposal bans anything new it will be the case that there are reprisals that a secular organisation can take against former members without breaking the law that will be illegal for religious organisations. That is discrimination in law on the basis of religion and it certainly infringes the spirit, if not the letter, of GA #430.

It's also important to consider what is meant by punishment, persecution, reprisal and humiliation. When a congregation shuns a former member and will not speak to or associate with them this is clearly a very unpleasant experience, especially if most people in the community are part of the congregation. Yet because individuals must be free to associate or not associate with others as they choose I don't see how you can ban this practice without fundamentally compromising freedom of association, or how that would avoid making a criminal of a person who ends a friendship with someone because they no longer share their religion.

Good point.
In my suggested rewrite, in the post just above yours, I've now added "beyond those forms of treatment that would be legal for secular reasons" at the end of the new Clause 2.

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 4:36 am
by Uan aa Boa
Bears Armed wrote:In my suggested rewrite, in the post just above yours, I've now added "beyond those forms of treatment that would be legal for secular reasons" at the end of the new Clause 2.

I might be missing something, but aren't actions "beyond what would be legal" already... well, for want of a better word, illegal?

Also, does your version have any active clauses other than 4 (and 8 insofar as it relates to 4)? I'm assuming that acknowledging or recognising a right doesn't in itself entail any action to realise it in practice?

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 5:48 am
by Bears Armed
Uan aa Boa wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:In my suggested rewrite, in the post just above yours, I've now added "beyond those forms of treatment that would be legal for secular reasons" at the end of the new Clause 2.

I might be missing something, but aren't actions "beyond what would be legal" already... well, for want of a better word, illegal?
TYes, but in conjunction with clause 8 it hopefully should reduce the chance of national/local authorities ignoring complaints about actions that do exceed that limit.
I've changed the wording to "that would also be legal if carried out for reasons other than religiously-motivated ones": Do you consider that better?

Uan aa Boa wrote:Also, does your version have any active clauses other than 4 (and 8 insofar as it relates to 4)? I'm assuming that acknowledging or recognising a right doesn't in itself entail any action to realise it in practice?
Clause 8 should also apply to clause 2, protecting that "acknowledged" right, and also to clause 5 & to the limitation that clause 7 places on clause 6.

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 6:38 am
by Ardiveds
OOC: I do think the question of apostasy should be handled like the marriage, similar to how the WA regulates legal marriages but not religious ones. Simply put, why should the WA care if a religion acknowledges someone's apostasy as long as the state does. Plus, you're not convincing the followers of a religious leader to acknowledge apostasy if they know the leader had to do it cause of WA laws. However, the rest of the clauses seem fine.

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 7:19 am
by Island Girl Herby
Ehhhhh correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t the current draft prohibit acts like excommunication? If so, why?

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 8:16 am
by Daarwyrth
Bears Armed wrote:OOC: If you grant an explicit exception to this clause for cases where such doctrines would apply then some nations will probably start saying that other aspects of how they [mis]treat apostates are also matters of fundamental doctrine, and demanding exceptions for those as well. I'd just drop this clause... but maybe add one requiring that apostasy be recognised as legal within all member nations? (That latter point might already be covered by existing legislation, I forget, but better safe than sorry...)
Perhaps, also, clarify that -- within any limits set by earlier resolutions that are still in force -- religious organisations legally can exclude apostates from their premises & their employ?

EDIT: Also, this would probably be easier to pass as '|Civil Rights', with slight rewording so that all of its operative clauses actually say that they are giving the apostates freedom for/from the various possible problems rather than say that they are banning the religious organisations from causing those problems, rather than as 'Moral Decency'.

FOR EXAMPLE:

Protecting Apostates
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant



Cognizant of its commitment to grant all inhabitants of member nations the right to practice their religion freely and in peace, and in a manner that is in agreement with their conscience, and their religion's teachings; yet

Equally committed to ensuring that the safety and wellbeing of apostates are secured, and similarly protected by the wings of World Assembly law;

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:

    1. 'apostate' as any natural person who has formally renounced their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    2. 'apostasy' as the act of a natural person freely and consciously, formally renouncing their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    3. 'religious leadership' as any individual, group or entity that has a leadership function within a religion, religious institution, or any other organised belief-system;

  2. Acknowledges the right of apostates and people considering apostasy not to be subjected to any form of punishment, reprisal, persecution, or humiliation, as a result of their apostasy or their contemplation of this change, whether by religious leaderships or by individual or grouped members of a religion or organised belief-system, beyond those forms of treatment that would also be legal if carried out for reasons other than religiously-motivated ones;

  3. Clarifies that, as far as earlier resolutions that are still force allow, religious institutions are still allowed to bar apostates from employment in their service or access to their premises (except for any parts of those premises that are being used at the time for significant 'secular' purposes, for example as polling stations or as emergency shelters) or participation in their religious & social activities;

  4. Decrees that the process of apostasy must not be unduly restricted, or obstructed by onerous bureaucracy, or force individuals to pass through discouraging or humiliating practices in order to enact it;

  5. Recognises that apostates, and individuals contemplating apostasy, have the right to privacy regarding the reasoning behind their decision to commit apostasy;

  6. Clarifies that religious leaderships, or individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, are permitted to attempt to convince those contemplating apostasy, or apostates themselves, to remain faithful through reasonable conversation and debate;

  7. Specifies that Clause 6 may only be enacted when an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, has freely and consciously given their consent to such;

  8. Requires that member states enforce the articles of this resolution in a manner that entices compliance, or that inspires deterrence regarding non-compliance with the content of this legislation.



OOC: I absolutely agree with the proposed rewrite as in your example, and I would like to take it over as the new draft. Would you like me to list you as the co-author considering the rewrite you did? :)

Uan aa Boa wrote:As I said in discussions in Forest and now share here for a wider audience, it is to be hoped that in reasonable nations there will already be laws on assault, harassment and other severe forms of reprisal not because of specific protection for apostates but simply because citizens are not able to treat each other that way. Nonetheless, where this proposal bans anything new it will be the case that there are reprisals that a secular organisation can take against former members without breaking the law that will be illegal for religious organisations. That is discrimination in law on the basis of religion and it certainly infringes the spirit, if not the letter, of GA #430.

It's also important to consider what is meant by punishment, persecution, reprisal and humiliation. When a congregation shuns a former member and will not speak to or associate with them this is clearly a very unpleasant experience, especially if most people in the community are part of the congregation. Yet because individuals must be free to associate or not associate with others as they choose I don't see how you can ban this practice without fundamentally compromising freedom of association, or how that would avoid making a criminal of a person who ends a friendship with someone because they no longer share their religion.

OOC: Those are valid points, and I hope you feel that the suggested rewrite by Bears Armed addresses (at least partially) the concerns you had?

Ardiveds wrote:OOC: I do think the question of apostasy should be handled like the marriage, similar to how the WA regulates legal marriages but not religious ones. Simply put, why should the WA care if a religion acknowledges someone's apostasy as long as the state does. Plus, you're not convincing the followers of a religious leader to acknowledge apostasy if they know the leader had to do it cause of WA laws. However, the rest of the clauses seem fine.

OOC: The idea I had was mainly to ensure that apostates would be protected in some form from potential consequences from religious groups. Even if it doesn't convince the religious members, they won't be able to do anything to the apostate that would infringe upon their rights. I think that is properly addressed in the rewritten Clauses by Bears Armed, but do let me know if you feel it should be approached differently!

Island Girl Herby wrote:Ehhhhh correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t the current draft prohibit acts like excommunication? If so, why?

OOC: This doesn't forbid excommunication. It protects people who willingly renounced their faith or religion. If a religion feels the need to excommunicate people right and left, they can still do that.

EDIT: I have updated the current draft with Bears Armed's rewritten clauses.

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 8:43 am
by Bears Armed
Daarwyrth wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:OOC: If you grant an explicit exception to this clause for cases where such doctrines would apply then some nations will probably start saying that other aspects of how they [mis]treat apostates are also matters of fundamental doctrine, and demanding exceptions for those as well. I'd just drop this clause... but maybe add one requiring that apostasy be recognised as legal within all member nations? (That latter point might already be covered by existing legislation, I forget, but better safe than sorry...)
Perhaps, also, clarify that -- within any limits set by earlier resolutions that are still in force -- religious organisations legally can exclude apostates from their premises & their employ?

EDIT: Also, this would probably be easier to pass as '|Civil Rights', with slight rewording so that all of its operative clauses actually say that they are giving the apostates freedom for/from the various possible problems rather than say that they are banning the religious organisations from causing those problems, rather than as 'Moral Decency'.

FOR EXAMPLE:

Protecting Apostates
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant



Cognizant of its commitment to grant all inhabitants of member nations the right to practice their religion freely and in peace, and in a manner that is in agreement with their conscience, and their religion's teachings; yet

Equally committed to ensuring that the safety and wellbeing of apostates are secured, and similarly protected by the wings of World Assembly law;

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:

    1. 'apostate' as any natural person who has formally renounced their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    2. 'apostasy' as the act of a natural person freely and consciously, formally renouncing their religion and/or religious beliefs; and

    3. 'religious leadership' as any individual, group or entity that has a leadership function within a religion, religious institution, or any other organised belief-system;

  2. Acknowledges the right of apostates and people considering apostasy not to be subjected to any form of punishment, reprisal, persecution, or humiliation, as a result of their apostasy or their contemplation of this change, whether by religious leaderships or by individual or grouped members of a religion or organised belief-system, beyond those forms of treatment that would also be legal if carried out for reasons other than religiously-motivated ones;

  3. Clarifies that, as far as earlier resolutions that are still force allow, religious institutions are still allowed to bar apostates from employment in their service or access to their premises (except for any parts of those premises that are being used at the time for significant 'secular' purposes, for example as polling stations or as emergency shelters) or participation in their religious & social activities;

  4. Decrees that the process of apostasy must not be unduly restricted, or obstructed by onerous bureaucracy, or force individuals to pass through discouraging or humiliating practices in order to enact it;

  5. Recognises that apostates, and individuals contemplating apostasy, have the right to privacy regarding the reasoning behind their decision to commit apostasy;

  6. Clarifies that religious leaderships, or individual members of a religion or organised belief-system, are permitted to attempt to convince those contemplating apostasy, or apostates themselves, to remain faithful through reasonable conversation and debate;

  7. Specifies that Clause 6 may only be enacted when an apostate, or an individual contemplating apostasy, has freely and consciously given their consent to such;

  8. Requires that member states enforce the articles of this resolution in a manner that entices compliance, or that inspires deterrence regarding non-compliance with the content of this legislation.



OOC: I absolutely agree with the proposed rewrite as in your example, and I would like to take it over as the new draft. Would you like me to list you as the co-author considering the rewrite you did? :)

You're welcome to use it as the new draft, and if you want to list me as co-author (either as this nation or, as would have been the case if I'd been IC in this thread, as Bears Armed Mission instead) then I won't say no.

Looking at it again, I'd make three minor changes _
1. Change "Protecting", in the title, to "Protection of".
2. In the current clause 3, remove the quotation marks from around the word 'secular'.
3. Insert another short clause, either before the current clause 2 or after the current clause 3, along the lines of
[*]Requires that member states treat apostacy as legal within their jurisdictions;

What do you think about these points?

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 8:47 am
by Daarwyrth
Bears Armed wrote:You're welcome to use it as the new draft, and if you want to list me as co-author (either as this nation or, as would have been the case if I'd been IC in this thread, as Bears Armed Mission instead) then I won't say no.

Looking at it again, I'd make three minor changes _
1. Change "Protecting", in the title, to "Protection of".
2. In the current clause 3, remove the quotation marks from around the word 'secular'.
3. Insert another short clause, either before the current clause 2 or after the current clause 3, along the lines of
[*]Requires that member states treat apostacy as legal within their jurisdictions;

What do you think about these points?

OOC: I think these points are excellent. I'll work them into the draft now, and list Bears Armed Mission as the co-author, as that only seems fair to me considering the rewrites you put in :)

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 8:49 am
by Bears Armed
Daarwyrth wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:You're welcome to use it as the new draft, and if you want to list me as co-author (either as this nation or, as would have been the case if I'd been IC in this thread, as Bears Armed Mission instead) then I won't say no.

Looking at it again, I'd make three minor changes _
1. Change "Protecting", in the title, to "Protection of".
2. In the current clause 3, remove the quotation marks from around the word 'secular'.
3. Insert another short clause, either before the current clause 2 or after the current clause 3, along the lines of
[*]Requires that member states treat apostacy as legal within their jurisdictions;

What do you think about these points?

OOC: I think these points are excellent. I'll work them into the draft now, and list Bears Armed Mission as the co-author, as that only seems fair to me considering the rewrites you put in :)

Thank you.

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 8:50 am
by Laka Strolistandiler
Per the request of our Chief Cleric, we are offering our full support for this resolution. Glyton supports the protection of apostates.

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 8:59 am
by Daarwyrth
Bears Armed wrote:Thank you.

OOC: Done! I have also changed the mention of Clause 6 to Clause 7, because of the addition of the new Clause 2 :)

Laka Strolistandiler wrote:Per the request of our Chief Cleric, we are offering our full support for this resolution. Glyton supports the protection of apostates.

Vyn Nysen: "Thank you, Ambassador, our delegation is appreciative of your support."

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 9:30 am
by Bears Armed Mission
Oops! I think that what is now clause 4 needs a rewrite...
[*]Clarifies that, as far as earlier resolutions that are presently in force allow, religious institutions are still allowed to bar apostates from employment in their service, from access to their premises (except as necessary [i] for the proper performance of jobs in the emergency services, official safety inspectorates, or armed forces); and (ii) for access to any parts of those premises that are being used at the time for significant secular purposes, for example as polling stations or as emergency shelters), and from participation in their religious and social activities;

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 9:40 am
by Uan aa Boa
Bears Armed wrote:
Uan aa Boa wrote:I might be missing something, but aren't actions "beyond what would be legal" already... well, for want of a better word, illegal?

Yes, but in conjunction with clause 8 it hopefully should reduce the chance of national/local authorities ignoring complaints about actions that do exceed that limit. I've changed the wording to "that would also be legal if carried out for reasons other than religiously-motivated ones": Do you consider that better?

If the new draft is encouraging member states to work towards a situation in which apostates don't suffer negative consequences without being prescriptive about how they do that, and without requiring them to criminalise specific actions like the original draft did, then the situation is completely different and the precise wording much less important. I'd be happy with a much simpler "acknowledging that apostates should not be subject to..." Returning to my original example of being shunned by the community, although I think that's impossible to simply ban I do agree that governments should work towards a situation where it doesn't happen.

This moves the draft in the right direction. I feel that too much GA legislation is simplistic in simply banning things that are the result of complex processes. The recent resolution on honour-based violence was a prime example. Such issues are best addressed through social policy in a broad sense rather than simple bans. With both honour-based violence and the treatment of apostates, progress is likely to be slow and delivered more through education (in the sense of improving educational attainment in general, not just having a "be nice to apostates" lesson in civics) rather than through creating new crimes.

Daarwyrth wrote:Those are valid points, and I hope you feel that the suggested rewrite by Bears Armed addresses (at least partially) the concerns you had?

Yes indeed - see above. I will have some further minor suggestions but I don't have time for them today.