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: Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles
Details
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: June 2457
Description[?]:
| Article 1-- Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards Peerage and Title. Old value*:: Both Hereditary and Appointed Peers and Titles and are entitled to the Title, privileges and legality of their station. Current: All Hereditary Peerages and Titles are Nullified and Government cannot appoint Peers or Titles. Proposed: Right to Title for Hereditary Peers and Titles reinstated. Privilege to maintain Estate Commons reinstated Legal, Military, Religious and Judicial Privileges are Not reinstated. Estate Commons exempt from taxation * the old value in this case being the pre-democracy state of the law. -Rothschild |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 02:18:23, September 14, 2007 CET | From |  Action | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | For those who maybe are unclear of the terms i will attempt to clarify. An Hereditary Peerage is a title and social rank passed from Father to child, if the mother is also of Title then the second child gains her title, If both parents of an only child are titled then both titles are passed onto the child who has the choice of leaving all his titles to one child or spliting them between his childern. A Hereditary Title differs from a peerage in that if the state has a House of Lords peers are garunteed a place in the house, and in times of National Emergency the Peers are required to report to the head of state and lead the military and hereditary titles and any knights are required to raise a militia to support the state. Although the bill does not reintroduce these features. Common Land is land owned by a Peer or Title, but with the proviser that anyone who so wishes can use the common land for the growing of crops, collection of faggots and temporary [less than a month.] residence, without charge. Keeping common land is one of the responsiblities of the rural Peers and Titled individuals, not so much an issue for those whos lands have been overtaken by urban sprawl. The Right to Title is the legal right to your Title. As to be offically addressed for your title and for those who havent earned a title not to be named by it. i.e. Baron Thomas Phillips of Ynyr is addressed offically as Baron Ynyr, the Right-Honourable Baron Ynyr or Thomas Phillips of Ynyr, but Mr. Stevens who works part-time at the Fitburg Boots n' More! doesnt have the right to offically declare himself as Baron Stevens of Boots, unless hes moonlighting as a Jazz Musician, as stage names while offical in a sense are not offical Titles with a capital T. |
| Date | 02:28:32, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Action | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | Reds please focus on the good common land will do for the people Leage you look to the liberty of the lords An ICE look towards to monarchist dreams. this is a good bill to pass. -Syme |
| Date | 03:16:06, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Imperial Cildanian Egoists | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | ICE has no problem with this proposal OOC: You should suggest a set of nobility options in the forum, so that this would actually have an effect |
| Date | 04:00:53, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | Absolutely oppose. The idea of governments granting titles and privileges to certain people flies in the face of individual liberty. |
| Date | 04:35:44, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Action | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | And what if those privileges do nothing to curtrail the liberty of the individual And what of the freedoms gained by the poor and disposessed on the common lands. All that this bill does is allow a hereditary peer or title the right to use the name he was born to. and the right to, on the provisor that the land is allowed free for common use, to have his property untaxed. Where is the loss of liberty. |
| Date | 04:41:26, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Imperial Cildanian Egoists | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | We are afraid we have to agree that your argument fails to hold water on this point JLC. When one individual possesses something, whether it be property, privileges, or title, and that possession is not in any way the result of government theft from another individual with prior claim, then the only way one could argue that liberty is infringed is by saying that the advancement of one is to the inherent detriment of the other. This type of argument tastes of communism. "Equality" is certainly infringed, but equality is traditionally an enemy of liberty, not it's protector. |
| Date | 05:13:43, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | What business is it of the government what title a person uses? Let him call himself whatever he wishes. If he is a property owner, let him accept the responsibility for using the land however he wants and allow whoever he wants to occupy it. There are currently no property taxes anywhere, but that fact is moot. Every individual is subject to the same laws of liberty and property, regardless of what titles they have. Creating different laws for certain people violates human rights. |
| Date | 07:37:55, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Action | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | The difference between those born to priviliage and those born without is less than the difference between those born in wealth families and those born to the poor. In the current society, only the rich can get good education and so the poor are inheritly disadvantaged. Myself and many of the other hereditary titles would feel that to claim a title to which you were not entirely intitled would be an insult to both yourself and all others with title. Only what is earned it the mantra of the co-alition, and the titled families who remain are all those who were gained their titles for centuries of their families standing in defence of Cildania or before that the five kingdoms, certainly earned them. If no-one else wishes for something in the bill to altered slightly, then I will request to the proposer of the bill to forward it to the Vote. -Melissa Tombs |
| Date | 08:32:06, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Imperial Cildanian Egoists | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | I have to disagree with the JLC on this issue. People have a right to their heritage. Inheriting a title should not be treated differently than inheriting land or other property. If an ancestor had something by right, and leaves it to his descendants, why should they not receive it? This reminds me of some bastard child of communist propaganda and nazi book burning. |
| Date | 11:19:14, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Action | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | Weither or not this bill is past, the Felway and Rovolly estates are open for all to use. but without the freedoms of taxation and the right to commons there is no garuntee of their sustainibility. |
| Date | 16:37:24, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Imperial Cildanian Egoists | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | Given that, as JLC said, there is currently no property tax anyway, the only practical effect of this legislation is to allow individuals to fully embrace their cultural heritage, and pay homage to a bright time in our nation's history. |
| Date | 18:08:43, September 17, 2007 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | The practical effect is it turns the government to a holder of titles and bestower of privileges, which means the government promotes a kind of racism and mercantilism not seen since the "bright time" of the dark ages when people lived short brutish lives in feudal serfdom. Plus if there will be future property tax for some reason, this bill grants the recognized nobility special exemption... evil all around. |
| Date | 21:18:14, September 17, 2007 CET | From | Imperial Cildanian Egoists | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | The government into a holder of titles? At most, it turns them into a bestower of titles. That would be the theoretical most, under the current proposal the full extent of the government involvement would be to recognize hereditary titles, not to grant new titles. Titles are most fairly considerable as intangible personal property. Why should a parent not be allowed to leave his property to his child? As to the possible property tax exemption, it is in no way unfair. If the possession of land can be traced back to a government land grant to an ancestor of the current holder, and such tax exemption was part of the original grant, then it would be a convenant running with the land, a principle of property at common law which should not even require this legislation to implement. All in all, the current proposal would amount to little more than an official recognition of rights already possessed by the landholder. |
| Date | 22:36:20, September 17, 2007 CET | From | Marxist-Leninist Happiness Front | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | This is something our party ideologically must oppose. Privileges should be earned via work and ability not birth. That said it does seem like something fun to add to the game. Thus we'll abstain and if you can actually get this implemented ... then we'll worry about overturning it. |
| Date | 05:08:11, September 18, 2007 CET | From | War is Peace Party | To | Debating the Revival towards the entitlement of Hereditary Peerages and Titles |
| Message | MLHF don't abstain, you know it to be wrong. you have a responsibility to your constituents to do what you think is right. OOC: the game is no longer being worked on, he is working on the next one. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 222 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 101 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 102 |
| Random fact: Players have a responsibility to differentiate between OOC (out-of-character) and IC (in-character) behaviour, and to make clear when they are communicating in OOC or IC terms. Since Particracy is a role-playing game, IC excesses are generally fine, but OOC attacks are not. However, players must not presume this convention permits them to harass a player with IC remarks that have a clear OOC context. |
| Random quote: "Morality is simply the attitude we adopt towards people whom we personally dislike." - Oscar Wilde |