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: Pornography protection legislation
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic Labour Union
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: April 2455
Description[?]:
| The DLU respects the rights of adults to purchase publications of their choice and in no way wish to infringe on this right. However, while the current legislation does prevent minors from purchasing adult material it does not however make a statement on what material is appropriate. For example should it be permitted for minors to be displayed in pornographic acts? Within the current framework this may well be possibility in our humble opinion. Furthermore there is also the matter of individual agreement. We have some concern that the current legislation do not adequately protect the right of individuals and may be forced into doing acts against their will. One of the fundaments of a free society is the understanding of free will. In no way should others be able to use their free will at the expense of others, particularly when talking about pornography. Jason Harte DLU Speaker for Justice |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The distribution, purchasing and possession of material depicting pornographic acts.
Old value:: All forms of pornography are legal, but only for adults.
Current: All forms of pornography are illegal.
Proposed: Pornography depicting consenting adults is legal for adults.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 02:02:21, September 11, 2007 CET | From | Progressive Socialist Party | To | Debating the Pornography protection legislation |
| Message | In all moral decisions the important question to ask is: "what real harm is done". We oppose the proposal of the DLU as we see no or very little real harm done. The real harm lies in rape and child abuse which is already illegal and has always been. This proposal does not outlaw such acts - the proposal outlaws pornography depicting such acts and there is a huge difference. If a rape scene is indeed real it is a deplorable criminal act that is already illegal but if it is just fiction, acting or animation no real harm is done and it is should not be banned. What this proposal is really about is banning a certain kind of fiction and the underlying logic of this proposal could be used to ban action movies as they depicts murder and violence which is wrong. Ralph Debs PSP speaker on Justice |
| Date | 12:28:42, September 11, 2007 CET | From | Democratic Labour Union | To | Debating the Pornography protection legislation |
| Message | We thank the honourable colleague from the PSP for their reply. To clarify, it is not so much the content we which to have protection against, but what circumstances the content may be made under. In our view pornography requires the consent of the individual or individuals involved. We are concerned that if under the law consent to appear in pornographic material whether it be print or film may not adequately protect vulnerable citizens. To follow the “what real harm is been done” logic through. Serious harm can be done without actually engaging in sex. What if someone is forced into having pornographic photographs taken under duress because a member of their family’s life is being threatened? While that person may not have been physically harmed, they have been harmed in a psychological way. Under the current law we see no recourse for them. The example I have provided is only one, but there are numerous situations such as these I can think of. When it comes to sex or any act upon which the individual has to use their body for the gratification of others (which does not necessarily mean intercourse) the individual must under all circumstances give their consent. For us as responsible legislators not to set the tone is this regard would be failing to protect one of our citizens fundamental liberties. The right to choose about how their bodies may or may depicted or used. Jason Harte DLU Speaker for Justice |
| Date | 22:44:20, September 11, 2007 CET | From | Progressive Socialist Party | To | Debating the Pornography protection legislation |
| Message | Today all the acts you describe are already illegal and rightly so. But it should not be illegal to make something that looks like it without being it - just as it should not be illegal to make an action movie depivting murder and violence. Ralph Debs PSP speaker on Justice |
| Date | 01:14:37, September 12, 2007 CET | From | Democratic Labour Union | To | Debating the Pornography protection legislation |
| Message | Honoured Speaker Debs, I fear you are missing the point, we're not talking about content here. I think I may have said this before and while we're on this can you please point me to the piece of legislation that refers to the protection of individuals who take part in pornography as I described? Jason Harte DLU Speaker for Justice |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 48 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 176 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 26 |
| Random fact: Cabinet ministers who disagree seriously with the head of government would usually be expected to resign. Parties within the cabinet may attempt to manoeuvre to replace the head of government though, for example by proposing a new cabinet bill or voting for an early election. |
| Random quote: "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting that vote." - Unknown |