WT34 Religion | Eco | Page 1

mellow bear Dec 19, 2022, 7:45 PM

#

Hi I would like to talk with you about god... or something like that.
We got an honest attempt to achieve a religion victory as well this cycle so I think we need to talk about that and the relationship of fed. government towards religion(s).
I think we all agree that science victory is prio 1 and the main focus for us.

I think we have some options as this point:
1: We support religion victory actively (either supporting otter religion, or supporting religions in general or establishing a "science" or loggiver religion to raise attention)
2: We stand neutral not working for or against any religion (just looking on WT citizens regarding proposals)
3: We work against religions as they provide wrong focus

#

Personally I dont see any valid argument for 3 as Religion Victory does not consume much money and is also not interfering in any other kind with constitution or science victory.
I would also not like to commit to otter religion because I dont see a correlation or "use" for our goals as government. But achieving additional victories is great (did we ever managed to achieve 2 at once?) so I would be ok with providing support for every religion as long as it is not eating up our meteor or science budgets. But i would prefer to be neutral then sending out money as we need much money for our own goals.

I would also really like the idea of a counter religion. That would benefit as a given % of citizens has to follow any religion and only biggest gets the win in the end. And a Religion is providing income through membership fees which we can use to found science victory as central theme. That would also enable citizens to actively support both victories with money as they want (we could setup some platinum membership as well). But this otion requires a commitment over next 2,5 weeks.

hoary fulcrum Dec 19, 2022, 8:00 PM

#

I don't really care for a religious victory but I will not stand its way either. I do like Otters a lot so I would side with that one more easily than others.

desert kestrel Dec 19, 2022, 8:01 PM

#

i personally stand more with option 2

frosty halo Dec 19, 2022, 8:06 PM

#

I don't see any reason for the government to work against religion, as I believe that could detract from us meeting our goals for the Science Victory. I'm more inclined, as an MP, for the government to take a neutral stance. However, I have publicly declared several times that I would support an otter protection (because have you seen their adorable little faces?!) and that I believe the Log Givers walk among us and wish for us to succeed in our endeavors.
If we support one religion in any fashion, I believe we should openly support all religions. Yet I share the concern about funding impacts, as there have already been concerns about our ability to finance the Science Victory. Therefore, I don't believe we can financially commit to support until we determine further revenue streams.
(edit: grammar; my cat hit 'send' for me before I finished reviewing)

#

Would it be a conflict of interest for a member of government to also found a religion?

hoary fulcrum Dec 19, 2022, 8:10 PM

#

I have a hard time with the Log Givers, as they have skewed the server economy in a way that is unjust, even for their godly powers.

frosty halo Dec 19, 2022, 8:10 PM

#

Is that your stance as our Prime Minister or as a private citizen?

mellow bear Dec 19, 2022, 8:11 PM

#

technically cinea is a member of government and founded a religion. But I dont see an issue. Same for membership.

#

I think its up to us if we want religion to be a political thing or not. But it seems we have a consent on being neutral (katfish still missing a statement tho). So I think we just have to keep in mind if we are talking as private person or as MP when voting on religion related topics.

frosty halo Dec 19, 2022, 8:23 PM

#

Agreed, neutrality seems to be the preferred method of the government officials

#WT34 Religion