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: The Family Values Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Lodamun Liberal-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: June 2415
Description[?]:
| The Lodamun Liberal-Conservative Party believes that currently, some of this nation's policies in regards to matters effecting children and the family are infected with an unfortunate, secular-humanist perception. We believe that this has created an unsafe environment for the children of this nation, and denied them the right to a wholesome, decent upbringing. We have a vision that this nation could become a safe place for children, where they can be brought up without corruptions glaring them in the face when they innocently turn on the television or internet, without being adopted by people who are unfit to raise a healthy child, without their parents, having married on a whim, divorced at the drop of a hat, leaving them with a broken home. The harmony and unity of the traditional family unit is what constitutes the very foundations of society - it is what makes up the moral fabric of our nation and instills the values of tommorrow's children, and we will protect the sanctity of this family structure at all costs. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Internet regulations.
Old value:: The government has no position on who may use or what is published on the internet.
Current: The government allows anyone to use the internet but the police can run investigations concerning illegal activities conducted by using internet (child abuse, illegal filesharing, ...)
Proposed: There is major censorship of the internet by the government.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Government policy toward marriage.
Old value:: The government does not involve itself in marriage or civil unions.
Current: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Proposed: The government only recognises civil marriages between a man and a woman.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding sexually explicit material on broadcast television.
Old value:: All sexually explicit material is allowed on television.
Current: Sexually explicit material is not allowed, but nudity that is not sexually explicit is.
Proposed: Nudity on television is banned.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:16:15, June 16, 2007 CET | From | The Unified Lodamun Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | While the Unified Lodamun's support much of this bill, we cannot vote for it in its entirety for it goes to far in limiting individual freedom. I am certain that the remainder of the party's in our great country will agree, and this bill will never see a vote. |
| Date | 05:55:43, June 16, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Distributionist Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | The Unified Lodamese are correct. This proposal is far to broad to win any real support. We recommend the LLC rewrites these proposals into groups of one or two proposals each. |
| Date | 10:55:49, June 16, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | The URP opposes most of this bill. We will not support it even if it is split up. We are Lodamun's most solid socially progressive party. |
| Date | 12:06:47, June 16, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Liberal-Conservative Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | We are more than happy to comprimise for our fellow partys - we would like to know first, however, which articles the ULP and the LDP agree with, and which ones they do not, so that we can best gauge which articles to include in a new bill? As for the URP, we did not expect this party's support. |
| Date | 19:41:00, June 16, 2007 CET | From | Radical Nationalist Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | We cant agree to No 1+2. We would prefer that these are removed from the bill and possibly seperated into a 2nd bill as that we can vote in favour of the last 3. |
| Date | 22:50:55, June 16, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Distributionist Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | Sadly, we can only agree to Articles 1 and 2. We would be in favor of strengthening Article 1. We could be convinced to vote for a lesser version of Article 5. |
| Date | 01:01:42, June 17, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Liberal-Conservative Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | Ok, we have altered this legislation to allow for only the last three articles and we will make a new one containing the others. |
| Date | 01:50:18, June 17, 2007 CET | From | Radical Nationalist Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | We must oppose 'major censorship', we feel that this will only damage the democracy and freedom of this nation. this legislation puts no limits on what the Government can censor. |
| Date | 01:53:17, June 17, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | When the NP and URP begin agreeing on issues you know these bills must be EXTREME. |
| Date | 02:24:32, June 17, 2007 CET | From | The Unified Lodamun Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | If the 1st article of this bill was less extreme, the Unified Lodamun's would vote for it, but as is, we cannot. If you have ever been on the Internet with one of those major censorship programs running the show, you would understand. I once couldn't read an article about the Yankees and the Red Sox because of "hate". I mean, they are supposed to "hate" each other. Its like ManU and Liverpool. You can't like both. |
| Date | 03:38:26, June 17, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Liberal-Conservative Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | Clearly the priorities of the electorate lie more with the careless, thoughtless actions of perverts than with a concern over children and their easily impressionable minds. Surely, a child's right to live a healthy and untainted upbringing is far superior to a perverts right to have pornography and other such morally reprehensible material available to the public at the click of the button. |
| Date | 06:20:00, June 17, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | "When the NP and URP begin agreeing on issues you know these bills must be EXTREME" heh. totally. |
| Date | 08:43:26, June 17, 2007 CET | From | The Unified Lodamun Party | To | Debating the The Family Values Act |
| Message | I will vote yes for this bill because of my moral stance on these issues personally, but only because this bill has already failed. If I actually had seats and could influence this vote, I would vote no. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 599 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players should not role-play characters without the consent of the owner, and if they find they have role-played the character beyond what the owner intended, they should withdraw or amend the role-play appropriately. |
| Random quote: "We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant." - Karl Popper |