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: Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal-Progressive Union
Status[?]: passed
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: July 2083
Description[?]:
| This allows for the deregulation of cosmetic testing on animals. The animals will not be tested with any toxic or deadly chemicals. Without full fledged testing there is no sure way of knowing if the products being used by humans are completly safe or not. We must make sure these products are safe. I hope my fellow parties in government will support this bill as do 50% of Hobrazians want this bill to pass. Included in this bill are strict provisions regarding the humane treatment of the animals. They will have access to medical care and will not be put in any unecessary danger while being tested. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The use of animals in cosmetics research.
Old value:: Animals may not be used for testing cosmetics products.
Current: The use of animals to test cosmetic products is unregulated.
Proposed: The use of animals to test cosmetic products is unregulated.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:28:05, July 20, 2005 CET | From |  Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | I hope we are all serious about the dangers of untested cosmetics pose to our citizens. The people are demanding we do something and we should listen to their health concerns. |
| Date | 09:58:35, July 20, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | Actually only 46% would be happy. I could accept this with tight regulations as that would make sure the animals are not too unfairly treated and it would be popular with a higher proportion of the population. Personally, there is no point as cosmetics can be,and are, tested before being sold to the general public. |
| Date | 11:02:23, July 20, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | Here is the latest poll, http://aiglesrv.no-ip.info:8085/particracy/main//viewnews.php?newsid=3456 |
| Date | 13:30:52, July 20, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | Sadly, we can't support this modified regulation. Though we understand the point made by the L-PU, and also undertsand the requirement for medical testing, cometics is not a life or death industry, and the pain that many animals go through in this sort of procedure cannot be justified with an end result that just makes someone look pretty. |
| Date | 19:32:28, July 20, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | There are plenty of ways to ensure that cosmetic products are safe for public consumption without testing them on animals. Can anyone name an example of a cosmetic product which has not been tested on animals and has caused harm to anyone as a direct or indirect consequence? I believe not. Cosmetics companies would not release onto the market an unsafe product. It is not in their interests to do so. Would you buy any product from a company who had released a single batch of toxic moisturiser? |
| Date | 21:10:30, July 20, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | I cannot believe what I am hearing. I want no animal testing on everything: but I can almost understand why for emdical reasons. But for cosmetics? Something which is not necessary to even have, yet you are willing for animals to be put through great pain for? We regard an animals life as being more important that some make-up, thank yuo very much; and I am shocked at your proposal. |
| Date | 21:32:37, July 20, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | Using natural, organic materials would ensure that there would be no need to have animal testing on cosmetics, as if you needed a reason anyway. |
| Date | 23:05:57, July 20, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | Unregulating the industry too is very dangerous, think of the cruelty which could happen and the animals which are exploited. I wish people would think with their conscience sometimes. |
| Date | 00:08:01, July 21, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | Or with their brains as well. |
| Date | 16:24:25, July 21, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Animal cosmetic safety act of 2082 |
| Message | I am absolutely shocked by this proposal. This is nothing more than midless slaughter for some lipstick or mascarra. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 212 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 188 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Discuss flag designs at the Flag Designs thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=37 |
| Random quote: "It is never too late to give up our prejudices." - Henry David Thoreau |