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: Survival of the Fittest
Details
Submitted by[?]: Regional Acronym Political Establishment
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: August 2443
Description[?]:
How can we begin to see the next stage of evolution if we keep artificially protecting the weak? Let nature decide. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy towards hunting endangered animals.
Old value:: Hunting endangered animals is illegal.
Current: Hunting endangered animals is illegal.
Proposed: The government enforces no regulations.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 04:35:13, August 17, 2007 CET | From | Secular Humanist party | To | Debating the Survival of the Fittest |
Message | For those which are naturally endangered, I would agree. But many, endangered animals are at that state because of human intervention. Destruction of habitats, over hunting of the animals. Even overhunting other animals which they live on. A lot of endangerments can be traced to human intervention, and we believe it is our duty to put right the damage we have caused. |
Date | 06:07:36, August 17, 2007 CET | From | Regional Acronym Political Establishment | To | Debating the Survival of the Fittest |
Message | What makes us so different than any other animal? We have so far only proven to be the fittest. Animals infringe on our habitat as well. It is clear that you do not see man as part of nature. Therefore you must see us as supernatural. Need I remind you of our laws prohibiting such religious beliefs? You are fortunate your death penalty bill did not pass, or I would see you hanged. |
Date | 08:45:01, August 18, 2007 CET | From | Secular Humanist party | To | Debating the Survival of the Fittest |
Message | Intelligence. Our intelligence far in excess of other animals has risen us far above them. We gained the ability to evolve in more ways than somply the biological manner. No longer are we prey to anything. And we have the power to destroy the whole world on a whim. With such power, comes responsibility. Yes, we are animals. And yes, we ARE part of nature. And it is our duty to protect our nature. Infringing on our habitat is one thing, but rarely fdo animals do damage to it. And on those rare occasions, (stray bears, predatory cats, etc) they are swiftly dealt with and removed. Animals do noty drive bulldozers through our cities, sweeping buildings aside to plant trees. And you who challenges my beliefs, has freely admitted yourself that you almost supported the freedom of religion act. Far more proof than any of your concocted lies. |
Date | 03:12:36, August 19, 2007 CET | From | Regional Acronym Political Establishment | To | Debating the Survival of the Fittest |
Message | The National Objectivist Party did not almost support the freedom of religion act. We did not even consider it because it contained poor grammar. We firmly believe this nation should remain secular, but we will keep an open mind whenever a party proposes a bill and give them the proper respect. However, if the party proposing a bill cannot even take the time to check it for errors, we will be unable to take it seriously. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||||
yes | Total Seats: 0 | ||||||
no |
Total Seats: 317 | ||||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Bill descriptions must be in English, or at least include a full English translation. Bill titles may appear in a language that is appropriate to the nation and are not required to be translated into English. |
Random quote: "A leader has the vision and conviction that a dream can be achieved. He inspires the power and energy to get it done." - Ralph Nader |