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: The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets
Details
Submitted by[?]: Tuatha Dé Danann
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: February 2467
Description[?]:
| Currently the government maintains a list of dangerous wild animals which may not be kept as pets; other wild animals may be kept as pets. However we feel that a wild animal kept as a pet, is not a wild animal anymore at all. Wild animals should be left alone living in freedom. Therefore we propose that the ownership of wild animals as pets is banned. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets.
Old value:: The government maintains a list of dangerous wild animals which may not be kept as pets; other wild animals may be kept as pets.
Current: The ownership of wild animals as pets is banned.
Proposed: The ownership of wild animals as pets is banned.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:54:15, October 03, 2007 CET | From | Free People's Movement | To | Debating the The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets |
| Message | I don't understand why this is worth restricting people's civil freedom. |
| Date | 18:51:07, October 03, 2007 CET | From | Tuatha Dé Danann | To | Debating the The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets |
| Message | Restricting people's freedom? I suppose robbing animals from their freedom is a much better thing to do? People that think of themselves to be better than the other inhabitants of our world (focusing this time on the wild ones), especially shouldn't be allowed near them, let alone keep them and take care of them, altough I doubt they can manage that. |
| Date | 19:50:03, October 03, 2007 CET | From | Free People's Movement | To | Debating the The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets |
| Message | Animal's freedom? If they're well cared for, I don't think the animal minds. |
| Date | 00:00:52, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Tuatha Dé Danann | To | Debating the The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets |
| Message | Why is an animals freedom lesser than any man's? What gives us the right to decide over their entire life? Maybe we should lock you up in a cage too and care well for you? Daily hose-downs and hot served food and all the other luxuries. Concluding out of your parties comment we're sure you wouldn't mind too. Even more, the text reads, wild animals. Not domesticated. A wild animal will like containment even less. |
| Date | 00:38:38, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Free People's Movement | To | Debating the The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets |
| Message | Why is an animals freedom less than man's? Because there's no indication that animals think about complex abstract ideas. Let's face it, their brains are less powerful, and more of it is put into movement and the senses. Some people aren't good at catching complex abstract ideas, you think squirrels can? All humans are fully able to comprehend freedom, and further, humans well being is dependent on their freedom, because without freedom, they will be exploited. We are opposed to the abuse of animals, but simple ownership does not seem objectionable. And as for wild animals, well, domesticated animals were all once wild. |
| Date | 17:25:42, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Tuatha Dé Danann | To | Debating the The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets |
| Message | So the people who have an IQ below 30 are also animals in your reasoning. Their brains are less powerful too, and even less is put into movement and senses. You want to cage them up too? However this is straying too far from the point now. |
| Date | 19:52:41, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Free People's Movement | To | Debating the The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets |
| Message | Does anyone have an IQ below 30? I didn't think that was possible. Can you give me an example of someone? Although I would argue that people in the 50-60 IQ range are effectively caged and taken care of. And if they weren't, they would eventually die. |
| Date | 03:31:16, October 05, 2007 CET | From | Free People's Movement | To | Debating the The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets |
| Message | Eh, it must be possible to have an IQ of 30, sorry. Okay change 50-60 to 0-60. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 126 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 328 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 45 |
| Random fact: "Treaty-locking", or ratifiying treaties that completely or nearly completely forbid any proposals to change laws, is not allowed. Amongst other possible sanctions, Moderation reserves the discretion to delete treaties and/or subject parties to a seat reset if this is necessary in order to reverse a treaty-lock situation. |
| Random quote: "You can't give the government the power to do good without also giving it the power to do bad, in fact, to do anything it wants." - Harry Browne |