[Serious] The revolution was successful! The old government is gone. You get to help write the new Constitution. What do you put into it?
[Serious] The revolution was successful! The old government is gone. You get to help write the new Constitution. What do you put into it?
You're viewing a single thread.
Okay, I'll start with a basic one. Equal rights for everyone, regardless of beliefs, physical traits, emotional traits, sexuality or financial situation - will probably need amendments since it's hard to come up with every possible circumstance.
regardless of beliefs,
What about Nazis?
They should still have the same rights as everyone else, and that shouldn't be a controversial statement. But of course, as soon as they break the law, they should be punished. If they never break the law, they should have every right to be shitty people in public.
The government choosing what is morally right and what is morally wrong and punishing people for holding morally "wrong" beliefs is exactly what led us to be in the situation we are in right now in the US and China. Not everyone will ever agree on what is right or wrong. Make laws based on actions, not beliefs, and if anyone commits those actions, punish them for that.
Permanently Deleted
Can you please elaborate on that? What beliefs do you think should be against the law?
Permanently Deleted
They are saying that beliefs shouldn’t determine laws.
That's not what I meant. I am saying you shouldn't be arrested simply for holding a belief. Not until you commit an action such as assault, murder, torture, forced labor, or one of a million other things that Nazis do should you be arrested. Being racist shouldn't be illegal. You should have the right to be a shitty person. But as soon as you hurt someone because of your racist beliefs, you should be arrested.
Permanently Deleted
Convincing others to kill Jewish people is an action that can be (and currently is in most places) illegal. It's conspiracy to murder.
Permanently Deleted
And that's something that is worth being arrested over. But if someone claimed to be a Nazi and didn't do any of that stuff, they shouldn't be arrested just for associating with people who do those things. That my point. Because that's a slippery slope. Some governments that I believe to be corrupt have already made beliefs illegal that I personally don't believe should be. Specifically for holding a religious belief. And then they are rounding up people that I believe to be innocent and put them in forced labor camps. I believe this is too real of a possibility of a government has a history of doing this, what's to say they won't also do it to a belief you have? We can all agree Nazism is bad. But what if a government decides leftism is bad and all leftists should be arrested? Even if you have don't nothing but sit at home and hold those beliefs, you might still be arrested.
I mean I don't cherish the idea of giving a Nazi anything, but I still think they deserve equal rights, but it probably also depend on what you mean by rights. My interpretation would be that this include every service provided by the government. Handling groups like Nazis I think would fall under hate speech if they use their opinions to antagonize or incite violence towards other people.
Permanently Deleted
They exist in countries with coalition governments (e.g. Germany) and yes the Nazi parties are popular, but they do not hold a majority and likely never will, so their power is reined in (just as with other parties).
If the party didn't exist, then those fascists would just join other mainstream parties and sow division within them (see: UK and US politics). Fascist pigs should have a voice, and be represented, like anyone else. Their voice just shouldn't drown out anyone else, and that is the case in a government that has proportional representation as one of its founding tenets.
Equal rights yes but please remove the "lift crazy religious beliefs/rules to a right" thing some people interpret into "freedom of religion", especially as it affects children of those people or the ability of those people to discriminate in direct contradiction to the equal rights clause itself.