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 Research Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Luthori Christian Women's Association
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: April 2420
Description[?]:
Ethical standards should govern experiments conducted on animals. Belinda Braithwaite (Leader of the LCWA) |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The use of animals in cosmetics research.
Old value:: The use of animals to test cosmetic products is unregulated.
Current: Animals may not be used for testing cosmetics products.
Proposed: Animals may not be used for testing cosmetics products.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The use of animals in medical research.
Old value:: There are no restrictions on the use of animals for research.
Current: Animal research projects must apply for a license and submit to regulation.
Proposed: Animal research projects must apply for a license and submit to regulation.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 20:05:42, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Imperial Vodka and Pimm's Party | To | Debating the Animal Research Act |
Message | This is un-Christian. The Luthori Women's Christian Association shows its true colour as time goes on, and that colour is red! We wonder whether good Christian women have been corrupted by degenerate parties in the former KCCP. |
Date | 20:25:46, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Animal Research Act |
Message | Whatever every happened to God loving all his creatures? It seems you're the one who is un-Christian. By the way, the color of liberalism is blue, not red, and animals used for research have nothing to do with communism. If the LCWA really was communist, it would have pushed to nationailze medical research and cosmentic industries, period. The LPP once more shows its ignorance and hypocrisy. At any rate, the Secular Party is afraid it must decline its support. We believe animals used in cosmetic research helps prevent poor products that can endanger the public end up on store shelves. We must keep our priorities straight. We would, however, support regulation of animals used for cosmetic research, and we do actually support article 2. So, another bill close to this with the recommended change would gain the Secular Party's support. |
Date | 21:10:16, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Luthori Christian Women's Association | To | Debating the Animal Research Act |
Message | There are passages in Mosaic Law which clearly indicate man should have a respect for animals. Belinda Braithwaite (Leader of the LCWA) |
Date | 21:39:03, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Imperial Vodka and Pimm's Party | To | Debating the Animal Research Act |
Message | Ignorant? Perhaps. Hypocritical? Sometimes. Un-Christian? Never! If it weren't for Parliamentary privilege we should sue you for slander, sir, on our good characters. |
Date | 22:13:49, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Christian Royalist Party | To | Debating the Animal Research Act |
Message | I like article II but not article I. We either test these products on animals or humans. |
Date | 03:23:40, June 27, 2007 CET | From | Teleurstelling Party | To | Debating the Animal Research Act |
Message | We agree with the CDP. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||||
yes | Total Seats: 33 | |||||
no |
Total Seats: 26 | |||||
abstain | Total Seats: 24 |
Random fact: If you are likely to be logging in to Particracy with the same IP address as another player with an active account, please inform Moderation on the forum. Otherwise your account could be inactivated on suspicion of multi-accounting. |
Random quote: "Rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon so long as there is no answer to it gives claws to the weak." - George Orwell |