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: Marriage Reform
Details
Submitted by[?]: Protectorate Party
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: January 2424
Description[?]:
| A marriage should not be entered into lightly. When people agree to share their lives there exists a contract between them which cannot be terminated without cause. Those wishing to enter into a legal marriage must present their own vows to the local government, and these vows become the contract of marriage. Only for the breaking the terms of the marriage contract can a divorce be granted. Local governments shall verify that the parties involved are aware of the implications of the contract, and are entering into the marriage willingly. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The legality of divorces (if marriages are recognised).
Old value:: Divorces are legal, be it mutual consent, grounded cause or if one partner wants it.
Current: Divorces are legal, be it mutual consent, grounded cause or if one partner wants it.
Proposed: Divorces are only legal with grounded cause (such as adultery, or violence).
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the initiation of divorces (if allowed).
Old value:: Either partner may initiate a divorce.
Current: Either partner may initiate a divorce.
Proposed: Local governments decide who can initiate a divorce.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:56:27, June 30, 2007 CET | From | Liberal Party of Malivia | To | Debating the Marriage Reform |
| Message | The SLP believes that marriage represents different things to different people. We are fundamentally opposed to the change proposed in Article 1, in so far as it arbitrarily defines the contractual agreement that is marriage, for the people, when it should be the people that define marriage for themselves. |
| Date | 23:02:33, June 30, 2007 CET | From | Supporters of Science in Design (IP) | To | Debating the Marriage Reform |
| Message | We support part one, however we heavily oppose part II, because of the potential for gender discrimination. |
| Date | 04:50:55, July 02, 2007 CET | From |  Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Marriage Reform |
| Message | We suggest that article two should read that local governments shall be the arbitrators and witnesses of the contract of marriage. Thus the two articles together with our other marriage laws suggest to established a recognized marriage, the individuals will present their 'contract' to a local government official, and only if the terms of their contract are broken can an individual sue for divorce. Of course others can have unrecognized marriages or walk away from an existing one and still have it exist legally. |
| Date | 06:38:27, July 02, 2007 CET | From | Supporters of Science in Design (IP) | To | Debating the Marriage Reform |
| Message | Would you mind then, writing into the Description that Local Governments are not to discriminate based upon gender? We would vote yes if that is done. |
| Date | 03:45:30, July 03, 2007 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Marriage Reform |
| Message | Although we have no issue with adding that to the description, we are not sure how we could word it. The idea is that the terms of the marriage and thus the divorce are written prior to the marriage. The terms are determined by the participants and thus could be sexist provided both parties agreed to the contract. We added new wording to try and address the SSD's valid concerns. |
| Date | 10:02:59, July 04, 2007 CET | From | Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the Marriage Reform |
| Message | The Social Democratic Party supports article 1 as it strenghthens the bond of marriage and should ensure that marriage is entered into a little less lightly than is probably the case under the current law. We oppose article 2 due to our general opposition to federalism and more specifically due to the potential for gender discrimination. On balance the SDP will vote yes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 184 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 16 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If you want to know how many players there are in Particracy right now, check out the Game Statistics buried at the bottom of the World Map screen. |
| Random quote: "Politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians." - Charles de Gaulle |