Advertisement
by Imperium Anglorum » Tue Aug 09, 2022 2:53 pm
by Daarwyrth » Tue Aug 09, 2022 3:03 pm
Imperium Anglorum wrote:How does this pass Freedom of Religion's strict scrutiny?
Daarwyrth wrote:OOC: While I realise this is still a draft, I would like to direct the following question to the members of the GenSec: GAR #430 "Freedom of Religion" describes 'religious practice' as "any practice associated with a religion, be it practiced through rituals, prayer, or any other sort of activity, performed either individually or in a group". Would 'missionary work' fall under 'religious practice', and would, by extent, this proposal be illegal due to contradicting GAR #430?
by Imperium Anglorum » Tue Aug 09, 2022 3:33 pm
by Desmosthenes and Burke » Tue Aug 09, 2022 4:07 pm
Daarwyrth wrote:The way I see it, the argument could be made that missionary work would be impacting a culture and societal identity by challenging the beliefs that community already holds. For example, the missionaries may preach that a community is blasphemous and condemned to hell. Individuals who then follow those beliefs within that community, aka the newly converted, may then proceed to oppose that group's existing cultural identity as they would similarly consider it sinful. This might lead to tension and subsequently disorder, due to the two groups being in conflict with one another. That is why the proposal mentioned the erasure or eradication of cultures several times.
However, Honeydew and I are highly interested in the opinion of the GenSec on this matter.
by Barfleur » Tue Aug 09, 2022 4:50 pm
by Honeydewistania » Tue Aug 09, 2022 5:47 pm
It is quite infantilizing to tell people, especially from less-developed nations, that they are not really capable of thinking things through and making a deeply personal--and deeply meaningful--decision for themselves.
Alger wrote:if you have egoquotes in your signature, touch grass
by Magecastle Embassy Building A5 » Tue Aug 09, 2022 5:55 pm
Honeydewistania wrote:It is quite infantilizing to tell people, especially from less-developed nations, that they are not really capable of thinking things through and making a deeply personal--and deeply meaningful--decision for themselves.
It is deeply ironic to make this assertion about the proposal when this is the entire basis of missions. Missionaries have brought much pain, suffering and subjugation to the communities they claim to serve, not least through their cruel and coercive methods. Just like how it is perfectly normal and even better for people to practice religion outside of organised ones, people can and should convert without the influence of an imperialist.
-Benji
Wallenburg wrote:If you get a Nobel Prize for the time machine because you wanted to win an argument on the Internet, try to remember the little people who started you on that way.
Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:Our research and user feedback found different use cases of bullets, such as hunting, national defense, and murder. Typically, most bullets fired do not kill people. However, sometimes they do. We found that nearly 100% of users were not impacted by shooting one random user every 30 days, reducing the likelihood of a negative impact on the average user.
Comfed wrote:When I look around me at the state of real life politics, with culture war arguments over abortion and LGBT rights, and then I look at the WA and see the same debates about cannibalism, I have hope for the world.
by Morover » Tue Aug 09, 2022 6:09 pm
by Bananaistan » Tue Aug 09, 2022 10:45 pm
"Asserts, furthermore, the right of all individuals in World Assembly member-states to engage in any religious practice, or to refuse to engage in said practices, without fear of state punishment, reprisal, or persecution, except where restrictions on said practice are the least restrictive means by which to advance a compelling, practical public interest in the maintenance of safety, health, or good order,"
by Daarwyrth » Tue Aug 09, 2022 11:45 pm
Barfleur wrote:"It is quite infantilizing to tell people, especially from less-developed nations, that they are not really capable of thinking things through and making a deeply personal--and deeply meaningful--decision for themselves.
Morover wrote:"Although my nation supports repeal of Resolution 430, we cannot support this, which is all but a ban on all major religions from maintaining their membership. We understand what the sponsors are attempting to achieve, and find it to be nothing more than an attempt to shock member nations, from the most left-leaning to the most right-leaning, through its radicality. We find this proposal to be counter to the very purpose of the World Assembly to uphold basic freedoms, not restrict them. We see not the least practical interest in the passage of this proposal."
by Tinhampton » Tue Aug 09, 2022 11:47 pm
by Daarwyrth » Tue Aug 09, 2022 11:49 pm
Tinhampton wrote:Smith: If you want to repeal a resolution, repeal a resolution. Don't write a completely unrelated resolution in the hopes that maybe, just maybe, you might be able to attract enough support for a repeal of the other resolution.
by Lord Dominator » Tue Aug 09, 2022 11:51 pm
by Daarwyrth » Tue Aug 09, 2022 11:56 pm
Lord Dominator wrote:I’m just going completely OOC here, but feel free to treat it as IC from an ambassador that I’ve left unnamed (or just OOC, or whatever)
In relation to IA’s points about religions with some degree of encouragement to proselytize, how would you expect this to interact with those religions that have some idea that at the very least, a priest/whatever will attempt such if someone comes up to them?
Similarly, do children count as a “group” by your thinking?
Have you considered the reverse side of this, wherein members of a given religious minority seek to reach out to those who have been forcibly converted in some manner? As written, such would also seem to fall afoul, as at least some intention is towards the idea of potentially bringing them back.
by Lord Dominator » Tue Aug 09, 2022 11:58 pm
Daarwyrth wrote:Lord Dominator wrote:I’m just going completely OOC here, but feel free to treat it as IC from an ambassador that I’ve left unnamed (or just OOC, or whatever)
In relation to IA’s points about religions with some degree of encouragement to proselytize, how would you expect this to interact with those religions that have some idea that at the very least, a priest/whatever will attempt such if someone comes up to them?
Similarly, do children count as a “group” by your thinking?
Have you considered the reverse side of this, wherein members of a given religious minority seek to reach out to those who have been forcibly converted in some manner? As written, such would also seem to fall afoul, as at least some intention is towards the idea of potentially bringing them back.
OOC: Yes, those are very valid points that I hadn't considered yet. Children most certainly would constitute a "group of people", as they're a distinct group. And the reverse point that you bring up is also a very good point that I didn't consider prior to this, but which is quite obvious when you think about it.
As I said, I'm not going to force through an idea that receives commentary and feedback that clearly show and tell that it's not a good idea to go forward with it. That's why I put up the draft, to attract feedback and discussion.
by Daarwyrth » Wed Aug 10, 2022 12:03 am
Lord Dominator wrote:Fair enough all around - at the very least you’ve inspired me to potentially write my own version (maybe). I do appreciate the interesting proposal at least, much as I dislike parts.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Second Sovereignty
Advertisement