((Avindian, what reform do we have selected for the upper house? 2 per state, or by population?))
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
((He already responded, so this point is moot.
))((Hope you're feeling better!))
((See below.))
((Second page of the AAR has a screenshot.
Political reforms haven't changed.))It is the Supreme Court's ruling that the Internal Security Act does not apply, as there is no evidence the defendant turned himself in voluntarily; instead, he was arrested by the Gendarmerie. It does not give people carte blanche to do as they wish and then later claim amnesty. Therefore, the charge of High Treason stands. Jurors may consider the defendant's argument as they wish, but the charge itself will not be dismissed.
The prosecutor is now permitted to call witnesses; the defendant may cross examine, if he wishes. Any parties who have evidence pertinent to the trial must present it to both the prosecutor and the defendant.
Regarding normal Reichstag business, the following items are now up for consideration:
1.
2.
These matters are of sufficient importance to apply to both houses, and so all members of the Reichstag are entitled to cast their ballots.
All other governmental matters are considered resolved for this session, apart from the trial. Voting will proceed until Friday at 10 PM ((I've a prior engagement Thursday night)) or until the outcome is no longer in doubt.
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
Herr Hohenzollern, you say you layed down arms and surrendered, however, the report and many witnesses state that you had been arrested, which makes you eligable to be judged for High Treason, a crime you admitted to committing, even if you did it for the "good" of the republic. Therefore I do wish that the Honourable Members of this Jury refrain from voting Herr Hohenzollern innocent, because he showed a passage in the German Book of Law that does not apply to him.
Was I not clear in my opening speech, the militant socialist rings in Nürnburg were build on the persons of Herr Hohenzollern and Herr Trunk, Herr Hohenzollern may have lead the less militarised groups in the city of Nürnburg, but he still lead rebels who fought both the population and the German Republican Armed Forces. Also the report made by the commander of the Gendarmerie made it clear that Herr Trunk was not able to lead near 150 000 without subcommanders and amongt these prominent revolutionaries was Herr Hohenzollern. Therefore one can safely conclude that Herr Hohenzollern did commit the smaller crimes too, even if he swears that he did not want to.
Also, I find it low of Herr Hohenzollern that he only start funding the restoration projects - which are state-run and therefore unable to be invested in - when he is threathend with a prison sentence, but since pragmatism is not illegal, otherwise a large number of politicians may have had prison sentences, so I will let the Jury think of it as they wish.
((I will ignore all remaining faults in your IC, DG))
((1.Yes
2.Yes))
Was I not clear in my opening speech, the militant socialist rings in Nürnburg were build on the persons of Herr Hohenzollern and Herr Trunk, Herr Hohenzollern may have lead the less militarised groups in the city of Nürnburg, but he still lead rebels who fought both the population and the German Republican Armed Forces. Also the report made by the commander of the Gendarmerie made it clear that Herr Trunk was not able to lead near 150 000 without subcommanders and amongt these prominent revolutionaries was Herr Hohenzollern. Therefore one can safely conclude that Herr Hohenzollern did commit the smaller crimes too, even if he swears that he did not want to.
Also, I find it low of Herr Hohenzollern that he only start funding the restoration projects - which are state-run and therefore unable to be invested in - when he is threathend with a prison sentence, but since pragmatism is not illegal, otherwise a large number of politicians may have had prison sentences, so I will let the Jury think of it as they wish.
((I will ignore all remaining faults in your IC, DG))
((1.Yes
2.Yes))
Ferdinand rises once more
I know I am innocent, But I shall admit full Guilt for all I have been charged with.I have but a simple demand.Give me my own prefered method of death.That is all I ask.
He sits down again
I know I am innocent, But I shall admit full Guilt for all I have been charged with.I have but a simple demand.Give me my own prefered method of death.That is all I ask.
He sits down again
As one would expect, I support the Government Indoctrination Bill.
---
Regarding the Citizenship And Religion Act, I find article IV to be somewhat broadly worded. While the right to "hold" any religion is an important one, establishing the right to "practice" any religion opens the state up to all manner of problems.
For example, consider the indigenous Aztec religions. At the moment, anyone found practicing human sacrifice in the docks of Hamburg would be locked away for a very long time. But if the Citizenship And Religion Act were
in place, such a murderer could argue that he was only exercising his right to practice his religious beliefs, in which such acts are permitted - nay, necessary! - to appease Tlaloc or keep the sun rising or some such nonsense.
And that is before we ask the question of what it means to "practice Atheism". As I understand it, the Marquis de Sade had some rather strong ideas about what manner of behaviour is appropriate for an Atheist - and I would much rather not see Sadism given legal protection within the Republic's body of law.
Or let us consider the writings of Plato of Byzantium, whose writings encourage both the "abolition of Religion" and the seizure by force of the means of production by the working class. In the ongoing trials of the New-Colognian ringleaders, should Ferdinand von Hohenzollern be allowed to claim that his uprising was merely "practice of atheism" and therefore protected within the law of the Republic?
As far as I can see, Article IV is far too vaguely worded to be of value to the Republic, even as a general statement of intent.
I have some further concerns about the Citizenship portion of the Act. Given the territorial gains of the Republic in the last hundred years, there are many Franks and Poles within the Republic's borders who would wish to abandon the Republic and return their lands to their former owners - let us not forget those Franks who took up arms against the German Army just two years ago in the final years of the Anglo-German War, seeking to defect back to France and setting the path for the New-Colognians in the process. At the current time, to make it easier for such men to gain German citizenship does not strike me as a wise course of action.
But even setting aside my concerns about the Citizenship articles, I believe I have sufficient reason to warrant its opposition on the Religion article alone. I therefore oppose the Citizenship And Religion Act.
---
1. Oppose
2. Support
---
Regarding the Citizenship And Religion Act, I find article IV to be somewhat broadly worded. While the right to "hold" any religion is an important one, establishing the right to "practice" any religion opens the state up to all manner of problems.
For example, consider the indigenous Aztec religions. At the moment, anyone found practicing human sacrifice in the docks of Hamburg would be locked away for a very long time. But if the Citizenship And Religion Act were
in place, such a murderer could argue that he was only exercising his right to practice his religious beliefs, in which such acts are permitted - nay, necessary! - to appease Tlaloc or keep the sun rising or some such nonsense.
And that is before we ask the question of what it means to "practice Atheism". As I understand it, the Marquis de Sade had some rather strong ideas about what manner of behaviour is appropriate for an Atheist - and I would much rather not see Sadism given legal protection within the Republic's body of law.
Or let us consider the writings of Plato of Byzantium, whose writings encourage both the "abolition of Religion" and the seizure by force of the means of production by the working class. In the ongoing trials of the New-Colognian ringleaders, should Ferdinand von Hohenzollern be allowed to claim that his uprising was merely "practice of atheism" and therefore protected within the law of the Republic?
As far as I can see, Article IV is far too vaguely worded to be of value to the Republic, even as a general statement of intent.
I have some further concerns about the Citizenship portion of the Act. Given the territorial gains of the Republic in the last hundred years, there are many Franks and Poles within the Republic's borders who would wish to abandon the Republic and return their lands to their former owners - let us not forget those Franks who took up arms against the German Army just two years ago in the final years of the Anglo-German War, seeking to defect back to France and setting the path for the New-Colognians in the process. At the current time, to make it easier for such men to gain German citizenship does not strike me as a wise course of action.
But even setting aside my concerns about the Citizenship articles, I believe I have sufficient reason to warrant its opposition on the Religion article alone. I therefore oppose the Citizenship And Religion Act.
---
1. Oppose
2. Support
((Time to take out some trash))
In all this mess Heer Vincent van Gogh went to the judge bathroom, but does not come out again.After a long period of time someone else enters the bathroom, and finds the corpse of the Leader of the Socialist party, with its head missing(Which was later to be found in a gift box on a table in the SLD head quarters, with the text ''A gift to Democracy'' on a small note) and DEATH TO SOCIALISM carved in his chest.
((I want to start anew, and thus sadly must Vincent perish.))
In all this mess Heer Vincent van Gogh went to the judge bathroom, but does not come out again.After a long period of time someone else enters the bathroom, and finds the corpse of the Leader of the Socialist party, with its head missing(Which was later to be found in a gift box on a table in the SLD head quarters, with the text ''A gift to Democracy'' on a small note) and DEATH TO SOCIALISM carved in his chest.
((I want to start anew, and thus sadly must Vincent perish.))
Although Herr van Gogh and I have had our fair share of arguments, I cannot deny that the Socialist movement of Germany has lost one of its most prominent members and I have lost my first guide and friend in German politics, even if our cooperation and friendship ended quite abruptly, in this unacceptable and gruesome manner. I wish to offer my condolences to Herr van Gogh's family, the Sozialistische Partei and the German Unions. Moge je rusten in vrede, Vincent.
Deutsch Soziale Union
[Protectionism / State Capitalism / Secularized / Full Citizenship / Pacifism]
To "practice" a religion, even atheism, without interference means the ability to worship and express one's beliefs as one sees without fear of imprisonment or discrimination. Crime is still crime and this bill would not change that. The laws of the Republic would not suddenly be subservient to religion. This bill is about freedom of expression, not crime.
To use your example, Ferdinand von Hohenzollern would not be arrested for expressing a belief in atheism or for claiming his act was done under the name of atheism. He would be arrested for committing a crime against the Republic.
1. Citizenship and Religion Act: Aye
2. Government Indoctrination Act: Aye
-Herr Liberator
((Shouldn't I be called as a witness since I was Commander of the Gendarmerie during the uprising?))
((My former character is also available for questioning, as a member of the rebellion.))
With Herr Hohenzollern's confession, the prosecutor may make his closing statements and then make a sentencing recommendation. He may also choose to call witnesses, but he is not obligated to do so. The jury does not need to vote for guilt or innocence; rather, it will either vote to confirm the prosecutor's recommendation or appeal to the court's leniency.
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
((TJDS, what's the preferred acronym for your party so I can change it in-game? For AAR purposes, you also need to decide on a single leader for President, Chancellor, authority to negotiate with other parties, etc. I do not want another Gen. Marshall situation.))
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
((TJDS, what's the preferred acronym for your party so I can change it in-game? For AAR purposes, you also need to decide on a single leader for President, Chancellor, authority to negotiate with other parties, etc. I do not want another Gen. Marshall situation.
))
((1.DSU 2. Axel Wouters for President Franz von Bavel-Timmermans for Chancellor 3. I will lead negotiations, after which Nacho will either say yes or no to it))
No to the Citizenship and Religion Act. While others have argued over Clause IV, I believe that Clause II requires attention. This will allow any child born to a single German parent, regardless of location, to become a German citizen. To sum it up, if a German citizen decides to move outside the nation and retain citizenship, we could have the children of these people trying to enter our nation and claim citizenship when they are essentially foreigners. Also, as Herr Adimari has pointed out, granting citizenship to ethnic Poles and Franks who are fairly recent additions to Germany may be dangerous. I believe that to remove these issues, Clause I and II should be combined so that all people born to at least one German citizen within Germany will be considered German citizens.
Yes to the Government Indoctrination Bill.
- Wilhelm von Vandenburg
Yes to the Government Indoctrination Bill.
- Wilhelm von Vandenburg
Your Honours, the Right Honourable Jury,
As I have said in my opening statement, Herr Hohenzollern has admitted to being responsible for leading militants who is responsible for the death of nearly 12 000 German Soldiers, more than 146 000 registered civilian causulties and many more unregistered civilian causulties and High Treason to not only the Republic, but also the German people. Therefore I recommend the death penalty by hanging for Herr Hohenzollern, to rid this threat and disgrace for the German people and the Republic of German from this world.
Stadtholder Dr. Franz von Bavel-Timmermans
As I have said in my opening statement, Herr Hohenzollern has admitted to being responsible for leading militants who is responsible for the death of nearly 12 000 German Soldiers, more than 146 000 registered civilian causulties and many more unregistered civilian causulties and High Treason to not only the Republic, but also the German people. Therefore I recommend the death penalty by hanging for Herr Hohenzollern, to rid this threat and disgrace for the German people and the Republic of German from this world.
Stadtholder Dr. Franz von Bavel-Timmermans
I find myself against the Citizenship and Religion act because I believe that the current and much more stringent requirements for German citizenship must be upheld both in terms of residency requirements and the newely known to be dubious inheritance clauses. I do find myself in favor of the Government Introduction Act on the contrary. Lastly, I hear that Her, Hollezen has pleeded guilty to Treason I must submit my humble suggestion that the court sentence him to hang on the steps of the Reichstag like the traitor he is.