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 Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Radical Nationalist 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: February 2450
Description[?]:
| We believe that marriage is for a man and a woman to start a family, |
Proposals
Article 1
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.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 15:52:21, August 29, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Distributionist Party | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | This is not only the popular choice, it is the moral choice. |
| Date | 20:43:29, August 31, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | I don't think this is a moral choice. Government should stay out of deciding morality. |
| Date | 00:39:52, September 01, 2007 CET | From | The Unified Lodamun Party | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | The government should stay out of marriage is what the government should do. Marriage is a religious ceremony and nothing else. IF the government needs tax laws for people that cohabitate, then they can start having civil unions, but marriage is something ordained by God, not by Parliment, and God is not keen with same sex marriage. |
| Date | 07:53:40, September 01, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | Did God tell you this? |
| Date | 02:43:29, September 02, 2007 CET | From | The Unified Lodamun Party | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | His Word did, and "In the begining was the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word was God." So, in fact the answer to your querry is yes. |
| Date | 05:33:13, September 02, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | "His word?" I mean specifically. I could say anything is God's word. God told me to eat a peanut butter and jelly sandwich today! This really doesn't foster any sort of real debate on the merits of the proposal. ...Actually God just told me to vote against this. I urge all other parties to follow the true word of the Lord and vote no. |
| Date | 13:19:21, September 02, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | there. right there. that's what's wrong with this country. People can just toss out blasphemies left and right. FL isn't the most overtly religious of parties, however, we at least attempt respecting other people's beliefs. We may not agree with them, but we'll fight for thier right to have them. OOC: Also, if you're going to quote the bible to win an arguement, pick something that actually answers the question. there's at least 2 passages against homosexual relations in the bible, use one of those. On the other hand also "Love thy neighbor" and following that in parenthesis "(in da butt)" would also be acceptable. |
| Date | 18:33:18, September 02, 2007 CET | From | Independent Republican Party | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | Why should the Bible define marraige for this nation? I'm a practicing Catholic, but the Bible is 100 percent correct. Parts of the Bible, especially the Old Testament, are sexist and violent and sometimes serve to inflate the writer's image rather than to spread the word of God. Take for example the story of creation in Genesis. Eve succumbs to the devil's temptation and takes the apple from the tree of knowledge thus incuring the wrath of God. Genesis has her take the apple instead of her partner Adam to demonstrate that women started evil in the world and are thus inferior to men. So, just because the Bible condemns homosexual relations doesn't mean God condemns them. It also means that Lodamun should restrain from criticizing homosexual marraiges. |
| Date | 03:41:04, September 03, 2007 CET | From | The Unified Lodamun Party | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | Fl, if you don't establish that the Word of God is in fact divinely inspired as far as your own beliefs are concerned, then what does it matter if you spout off a few words. However, those words are in fact God's words, and there is no need to quote the Bible concerning homosexuality. I believe everyone knows that it has a strong stance against it, and speaks of it many more than 2 times. |
| Date | 06:24:53, September 03, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Marriage Act |
| Message | "I believe everyone knows that it has a strong stance against it [...]" Obviously everyone does not agree. You claim the bible supports your case but offer no support for that position. How can we take you seriously? ULP may win this vote, but the URP will continue to marshall political opposition to these radical measures. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 277 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 251 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 71 |
| 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: "If gays are granted rights, next we'll have to give rights to prostitutes and to people who sleep with St. Bernards and to nailbiters." - Anita Bryant |