Page 2 of 2

Re: [Discussion] Condemnation of Religious Extremism

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:14 am
by Jonas Windsor
This is just 'weird'. Why would we base a proposal on religious extremism? Focussing on religion in this matter, even with all those proposals in front of us, seems unnecessary and sends the wrong signal. Don't let atheism win!

Re: [Discussion] Condemnation of Religious Extremism

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2020 10:17 pm
by Cosmic Fury
Regardless of the wording involved, the Ralgon delegation still strongly objects to religion being the focus of this discussion. Any religion is able to be called violent and/or extreme by adherents of another. Additionally, each and every single polity here has a different opinion on what religions run contrary to national authority, and on what grounds. Issuing blanket statements to that effect will only alienate members of this organization.

Crush the rebels based on their actions, not their beliefs. If their actions against their oppressors are justified, enabling their religion to be targeted (especially by supranational elements) is simply unacceptable. If we target their religion, we'll be fighting them forever, if only for the mere thought that someone else is going to be next on the list of religious adherents to be suppressed.

Finally, determining what religion(s), if any, are considered to be violent and/or extreme are the sole prerogative of national governments. As we've stated before, interfering in a country solely on religious grounds is a clear breach of sovereignty, even if statements issued and actions taken to that effect are non-binding. We are a diverse nation that often calls on our people's faith when we are faced with a crisis. To attempt to shut others down for doing the same would be hypocrisy at its finest. For these reasons and more, Ralgon strongly opposes condemning religious beliefs of any type, especially when done in a general-purpose format.

In short, those who exercise violence and otherwise inflict pain on other people based on extremist beliefs should be dealt with according to their exact situation. The use of generalized statements is dangerous at best, and sets the MTO up as an organization that actively seeks to suppress religions that don't fit the mold of the majority of its member states.

Re: [Discussion] Condemnation of Religious Extremism

Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2020 6:25 pm
by Nathan
The Batavian delegation is welcome to propose a pro-religious topic for debate. The General Membership Treaty assures that each member state has the right to present a topic to the General Assembly and that the Opinion will be debated and voted on. This is a topic that a member state feels strongly on so it is being debated.
A- The General Assembly of the Micras Treaty Organization condemns the form of religious extremism or fanaticism that encourages violence or hatred against those outside of one's religion.

B- The General Assembly of the Micras Treaty Organization condemns the form of religious extremism or fanaticism that encourages violence or hatred.

C- The General Assembly of the Micras Treaty Organization condemns any form of public disorder or violence, occurring contrary to law, that is religiously motivated in its origin or conduct.

C(2)- The General Assembly of the Micras Treaty Organisation condemns any form of disorder, violence, murder, or any other form of harassment, that is religiously motivated in it's origin or conduct.

D- The General Assembly of the Micras Treaty Organization condemns the use of religion or faith as a justification for murder, torture, or assault.
So now we have five proposals for the wording of the text. I encourage delegates to indicate their preferences so we may have a final text to vote on.

Re: [Discussion] Condemnation of Religious Extremism

Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:14 pm
by Eugene Friedriechsen
The People's Republic of Graecia would like to tell again that while we have no absolute preference, we beieve that our proposal (C2) could fit excactly for the reason wanted.

Re: [Discussion] Condemnation of Religious Extremism

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:26 pm
by Nathan
Since option C2 has been promoted more enthusiastically, and it seems to generally fit other delegations' wishes for specific vagueness, we will go ahead with voting on the C2 text when we start voting on Monday.

I'll be sure to get the General Assembly back on a more regular debate/vote schedule as well.

Re: [Discussion] Condemnation of Religious Extremism

Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2020 5:34 pm
by Eugene Friedriechsen
The People's Republic of Graecia, as said many times, would endorse (AYE) the current text (C2).

Re: [Discussion] Condemnation of Religious Extremism

Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:43 pm
by Nathan
(Oh it's Monday isn't it!? :P )