We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Adoption Act: Revision of 8082
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progressive Conservative Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: October 2085
Description[?]:
Regarding adoption policy. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning who can proceed with adoption; in case adoption is legal.
Old value:: Everyone may adopt children.
Current: Everyone may adopt children.
Proposed: Only couples may adopt children.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 04:19:54, July 19, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | Whether hetero or homo we belive it is more stable within a couple. |
Date | 04:26:38, July 19, 2005 CET | From | Hosengott Nationalists | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | The traditional family grouping has lead many of past generations onward and has been the basis behind all of our creations we harbour no hatred towards homosexuals so yes any couple of any gender arangement should be allowed however it should be a two person job |
Date | 05:37:49, July 19, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | You would deny children a competent, loving home purely because you feel it takes two adults living there to successfully raise them? Many single parent families produce wonderful children, and many loving couples produce tearaways. We see no need for this unnecessary restriction. |
Date | 07:34:29, July 19, 2005 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | Agreeing with DS...not that anyone cares. |
Date | 16:47:56, July 19, 2005 CET | From | Hosengott Nationalists | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | OOC: I still love you libertarians >.> |
Date | 18:44:44, July 19, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | OOC: Hmm? Who? Oh, are they still a aprty..... ? :-P Nah, seriously I don't get why the LibLibs are doing so badly - we've voted together almost constantly since the end of the Entente, so why are we the largest party and they the second smallest? It doens't make much sense. |
Date | 23:34:01, July 19, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | "You would deny children a competent, loving home purely because you feel it takes two adults living there to successfully raise them? Many single parent families produce wonderful children, and many loving couples produce tearaways. We see no need for this unnecessary restriction." the childed once adopted will stay adopted even if the couple split up or divorce etc. Also it is true a single parent can bring up a child however this can and often is a financial strain and can result in (however well meaning the guardian is) neglect as the parent must work harder (think as in young children). |
Date | 01:41:59, July 20, 2005 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | OOC: Its crap thats what it is. The Entente was over a decade ago, Baltusia. Get over it! |
Date | 16:51:44, July 20, 2005 CET | From | Hosengott Nationalists | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | OOC: Nah the people loved the abuse to much ;) |
Date | 09:51:33, July 23, 2005 CET | From | Populist Party | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | We've voted similar to the LibLibs too and we're doing alright. |
Date | 07:38:39, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Family First Party | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | We would much rather see only couples adopt children, as we believe that the traditional family of two parents is what is best for a child. But we would also rather a child have a parent, as opposed to no parent. We make this decision with a heavy heart, but let all know that we would seriously consider reversing the law should the circumstance warrant. |
Date | 22:31:37, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Adoption Act: Revision of 8082 |
Message | We have reviewed the case and have learned that all potential adopters are screened though testing, and regulations. Therefor it is our conclusion that single parents will be viable if they pass these tests (as they must). We are reversing our position on this bill. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||||||
yes | Total Seats: 45 | |||||||
no |
Total Seats: 351 | |||||||
abstain | Total Seats: 24 |
Random fact: If there are no parties in your nation with seats, feel free to visit the forum and request an early election on the Early Election Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4362 |
Random quote: "The basis of a democratic state is liberty." - Aristotle |