|
President : Vice President : Vacant Home Secretary: Vacant Foreign Secretary : Vacant Treasury Secretary: Vacant Defence Secretary : Vacant Attorney General : Vacant Associate Justice : Vacant Associate Justice : Vacant |
![]() United Republic of Nations Est. September 2012 "Fides, Fortitudo et Amicitia " Welcome to our Regional Forum |
The URoN Times Constitution URoN Map First Meeting URoN Role Playing Games Voting Office Debate Room Referendums |
| Freedom of Politics Act; An Act to further define an Amendment | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 16 2013, 12:12 AM (149 Views) | |
| Leikistan | Apr 16 2013, 12:12 AM Post #1 |
|
President of the Region
|
Freedom of Politics Act RECOGNIZES that the Constitution of the United Republic of Nations does directly give member nations the right to their own politics. PRAISES the United Republic of Nations for allowing Political Freedoms. LAMENTS that punishment for discrimination is not clearly defined, leaving the door to discrimination still wide open. DEFINES Politcal Freedom as allowing any member of the United Republic of Nations to partake in the life-style of their own political affiliation (e.g. Communist, Fascist, Democratic, Republican, Theocratic, Technocratic, Socialist, etc) and the right to voice their opinions of Government according to their political affiliation and ideaolgy. RESTRICTS any and all Governmental officials and citizens from discriminating against those with a different political affiliation. This shall include: a) Slander against that ideology b) Trial against a member nation only on the charge of being of a different ideology. c) Banishment on the charges of different ideology. d) Prejudiced against others with a different ideology. DETERMINES that if any nation is found guilty by the Supreme Court or Federal Council of having practiced prejudiced based on another person’s political affiliation, then they should be sentenced to restriction from holding any governmental office for 6 months. a) If they are already a governmental official, they shall be stripped immediately of all power and authority and title on top of the existing required punishment. b) For those that have violated this law more than once (twice to be exact), they shall be banished. Edited by Leikistan, Apr 16 2013, 07:06 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Newport | Apr 16 2013, 11:56 AM Post #2 |
![]()
|
How does on differentiate between actual hate speech, joking, and, roleplay? What a person says during a Roleplay, should be never be held against them. Simply due to the fact that, it's well roleplaying they're putting on an act. While I live in Italy, and people have joked around with me and called me a fascist; however, I don't take it seriously. This act seems like an unnecessary piece of legislation that will only make things more complicated. Simply encourage the members of the region to play nice with one another, and let them know that rude name calling isn't allowed, and it won't be tolerated regardless of your position. |
![]() |
|
| Marginia | Apr 16 2013, 02:39 PM Post #3 |
![]()
|
Newport is right, 'slander' against some ideology can't be forbidden because that would restrict freedom of speech. And as I wrote on the RMB: The draft claims that "Constitution of the United Republic of Nations does not directly give member nations the right to their own politics." This is being amended in the Third Amendment, however, so the claim is probably going to be false. |
![]() |
|
| Leikistan | Apr 16 2013, 07:04 PM Post #4 |
|
President of the Region
|
First of all, Newport, let's act like adults. "Asking" Members to "play nice" is ridiculous unless it is founded by LAW! If we have no law, they don't have to abide by your suggestions. Think politically. |
![]() |
|
| Newport | Apr 17 2013, 10:09 PM Post #5 |
![]()
|
Don't belittle me. You're assuming everyone will join the forum once they join the region in order to read the constitution. Some people don't join forums, they choose to simply use the regional message board. First off what do we have that currently restricts nations from running their own nation as a communist, fascist, republican, etc. state? If there isn't anything restricting it than this bill is nothing but excess bag that would be a waste of a vote. While I will never support the restriction of speech by any means. |
![]() |
|
| The Holy | Apr 17 2013, 10:30 PM Post #6 |
|
I am firmly against this proposal. As many of you know I stand against fascism and dictatorship and I should have every right to voice that opinion. |
![]() |
|
| Newport | Apr 18 2013, 01:05 PM Post #7 |
![]()
|
i don't think you understand that there's currently nothing restricting nations from their government in a fascist or tyrannical manner. This bill would simply make it official that no government form can be outlawed, along with restricting freedom of speech. |
![]() |
|
| The Holy | Apr 18 2013, 07:43 PM Post #8 |
|
I wasn't saying that Leikstan is a tyrant. I am saying that I have the right to discriminate against dictators and tyrants.
Edited by The Holy, Apr 18 2013, 07:43 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Virgin Isles | Apr 18 2013, 08:08 PM Post #9 |
|
Which is more important, the right to free speech or freedom of persecuation. Flaming etc is already banned so maybe restrict this to gov ministers who use that position to persecute. To restrict all freedom of speech is too far, no? |
![]() |
|
| Leikistan | Apr 18 2013, 08:35 PM Post #10 |
|
President of the Region
|
I am and always have been of the conviction that if you are not granted a right, then you don't have it. I belive in formalism. I believe that everything needs to be addressed in the Constitution. I DO believe in full and complete Democracy, however, if your freedom of speech is hindering one from being all that they can be, then I think you are abusing your freedoms. You, Newport, I believe are the one that I have been debating concerning the Fourth Amendment. You always make claims how our current laws of no term limits and even our "long" terms can inhibit us from getting newer ideas and a fresh perspective in. So, let's put that into practice here. Who are you, ANY OF YOU, to degrade and attack one's own political conviction and/or afiliation? The very hatred which you view some politics with may be the very hatred with which they view you. If we allow this full "freedom" of speech, then I believe that we are keeping ourselves from experiencing fullness of new ideas. This is the 21st century folks, we ought not to go around stoning those that oppose us. If restricting your right to BASH and ATTACK fellow human beings brings forth newer, and possibly better ideas, then I am all for it. (Pardon and forgive me for my typing/spelling errors, I am on my Tablet) |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Passed Legislation · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Zeta Original | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
7:26 PM Jul 11
|







7:26 PM Jul 11