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, August 2366
Details
Submitted by[?]: Christian Democratic Alternative
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 2367
Description[?]:
| Even though we do not doubt the parental qualifications of homosexuals, we think that having two fathers (instead of a father and a mother) is rather stressful for a child. Next to questions on his descendance he also has to answer questions on why he has two fathers. |
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 heterosexual couples may adopt children.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:07:01, February 28, 2007 CET | From |  New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Adoption Act, August 2366 |
| Message | The honourable gentleman may see/cite my argument against his other fascist bill for some of the precepts behind my opposition to this one. Again, I think that there is a clear break between the sensible government of the centre-left co-alition and the evident hatred and fascism of the opposition. I believe the people's choice is clear. People care; ergo, so must we. He says that he "does not doubt the parental qualifications of homosexuals", his actions speak clearly otherwise. One hundred years from now, historians will look not upon what we said, but upon what we did. This act clearly speaks against the open and inclusive society of Hutori, and I am glad to have the opportunity to stand up for the homosexual community. Perhaps he has never met one, so permit me to tell him. Surprise, they are just like him. (Without the perverted beliefs system, of course.) I know it may come as a bit of a shock that homosexuals are people too, but the honourable gentleman must accept the fact. The objections to homosexual adoption raised by the honourable gentleman are simply flabergasting. What of ancestry? Is he suggesting that it matters what title somebody's great-great-grandfather held? Is he suggesting that homosexuality is a scarring fact of life from which little children should be shielded by the likes of him so that they re-act in the same fashion as he in the presence of people different therefrom? It is the height of ignorance to make any of these arguments, so I will not suggest to the house that the honourable gentleman was sincere in his proposal; or, perhaps, he has other reasons about which he would like to make us aware. |
| Date | 08:57:08, February 28, 2007 CET | From | "Le Chaim" - Aesthetic Party | To | Debating the Adoption Act, August 2366 |
| Message | Standing ovations also for this statement of my coalition partner. This is sensible political thinking. Knowing homosexuals I can only agree to every single word... |
| Date | 14:22:50, February 28, 2007 CET | From | Christian Democratic Alternative | To | Debating the Adoption Act, August 2366 |
| Message | The real life party upon which the CDA is based has had a homosexual minister in government and a good one too. I have watched a documentary on TV about homosexuals raising children and I thought them to be better parents then many heterosexuals. I seem to get the impression that you think I'm a homophobe, which is not true. Particracy is a game and on every issue you can take only a limited number of stances. In real politics one can add nuance to these proposals, here it is impossible. I also introduced this proposal for profiling reasons. My voter base is religious you know, and I need to increase my visibility in this area. This proposal was never meant to be considered seriously to become law. Once again: Particracy is a game, not a political forum. Any viewpoints laid out here don't necessarily have anything to do with viewpoints in real life. Profiling is such an important aspect of this game and profiling yourself as a religious party is difficult. And coming up with the same proposal all the time is rather dull. As the description above the bill reads, my concerns (in real life too) are centered around what a child must go through. Children can be enormously cruel to one another, because they cannot judge the full implication of their words and actions. Most adults fully accept homosexuality, but most children are oblivious to sexual orientation and may still think homosexuality is strange. Any adopted child runs the chance to get asked questions by his classmates. One of them is: Why aren't your parents not your biological parents? A child adopted by homosexuals may have to answer another one: Why do you have two fathers and not a mother? Having to answer one of these is difficult, imagine having to answer both. I don't think homosexuals have a bad influence on people and I consider them to be nice and amiable people. As to my religious beliefs, I don't consider the book of Genesis (including the reference to Sodom and Gomorra) to be a source of valuable religious guidance. Many things in it are impossible to take for the truth. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 27 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 48 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy has been running since 2005. Dorvik was Particracy's first nation, the Dorvik Social Democrats the first party and the International Greens the first Party Organisation. |
| Random quote: "When strangers start acting like neighbors, communities are reinvigorated." - Ralph Nader |