05-18-2008, 06:37 PM
The only real issue the government of Jagera sees is "Denial of right to religious observance". This is understandable in that unreasonably denying religious practice may be seen as a form of torture, but what about extreme practices, especially those that are against other laws (OOC: I'm thinking about the "Violent Violetist" issue, with human sacrifice.)
In Jolt, the author suggests "I think they're right that you could restrict more extravagant ones, because that restriction isn't 'for the purposes of...'." I'm not completely satisfied by this, though, as if you take this part to the extreme ('for the purposes of...'), it suggests to me that the infliction of what would otherwise be considered torture is fine if not done for one of the listed reasons in clause 1 (i.e. just for fun, or to "send a message" the entire enemy force, not just the one lone person).
Maybe I'm blowing this out of proportion, but this is just the first thought that occurs to me.
Notwithstanding the above argument, the government of Jagera is FOR this resolution. (Though we are sorely tempted to vote FOR and AGAINST since the delegate gave us that option
)
In Jolt, the author suggests "I think they're right that you could restrict more extravagant ones, because that restriction isn't 'for the purposes of...'." I'm not completely satisfied by this, though, as if you take this part to the extreme ('for the purposes of...'), it suggests to me that the infliction of what would otherwise be considered torture is fine if not done for one of the listed reasons in clause 1 (i.e. just for fun, or to "send a message" the entire enemy force, not just the one lone person).
Maybe I'm blowing this out of proportion, but this is just the first thought that occurs to me.
Notwithstanding the above argument, the government of Jagera is FOR this resolution. (Though we are sorely tempted to vote FOR and AGAINST since the delegate gave us that option
)