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: Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic Workers' Party and CTUL List
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: May 2467
Description[?]:
| This bill repeals the unnatural ban on public nudity. It is natural for human beings to see one another naked; it is long time we stopped wrapping our children in unnecessary cotton-wool. This bill does not, however, legalise consequential sexual harassment. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on public nudity.
Old value:: Public nudity is illegal, but private nudist colonies and beaches are permitted.
Current: Public nudity is illegal, but private nudist colonies and beaches are permitted.
Proposed: There are no laws with regards to public nudity, it is allowed.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:43:19, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Permissive Social Union | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | Great. dangly bits in the town square! Naked teachers! This is decadent policy. |
| Date | 13:45:44, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | We are inclined to side with the LFF. The last thing we need to see in the Convocation, is 'wobbly bits'. |
| Date | 14:36:10, October 04, 2007 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | Dude don wanna see no 'wobbly bits', Dude don hafta look |
| Date | 17:09:20, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | In the Convocation? That room ain't that big. And - seriously - who wants to be sat that near a NAKED Immeressen (God, or not) when he starts jumping around excitedly? |
| Date | 17:39:47, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Libertà Parti | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | We are all about not being naturally human, but more than human. This is a disgraceful policy. You might say that a person "does not have to look," but whether they look specifically at a naked person or not is aside from the fact that it is distracting. |
| Date | 17:42:35, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Libertà Parti | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | BTW - this is legalization, not decriminalization. Decriminalization means that, say in the context of marijuana, possession would still be illegal, but people could only be fined for possession; not arrested. Most traffic violations are decriminalized to an extent; unless you make a serious violation (aka - parking in fire zone), you get a ticket, but not a jail cell. This is decriminalization. We would support decriminalization of public nudity (aka - fine a nudist a few hundred LIKs for each and every violation), but we would never support legalization. |
| Date | 21:51:32, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Democratic Workers' Party and CTUL List | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | We suggest to the LP that they may like to start living up to their name and take a more positive approach on the issue of civil liberties. We also suggest that fancy, well cut remarks about being "more than human" are neither tangible or a real substitution for key policy. We further argue that a distraction of such calibre is only a distraction because it is out of the norm; with the freedom to "dangle", in the LP's own words, this will not be any more distracting than the sight of a homosexual couple tending to their adopted child - as could possibly have been considered a "distraction" 10 or so years ago. We, the DWP, do not believe that one individual should have the right to dictate to another what is moral or can/cannot be done, providing the particular liberty involved does not cause harm to any objective parties. In our opinion, a distraction is not equivalent to harm. OOC: Decriminalisation can include reducing a punishment to a fine, but is not limited to this. And for reference, both dictionary.com and Wikipedia agree that decriminalisation can mean the general legalisation of something previously illegal. |
| Date | 22:04:28, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Libertà Parti | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | Have you pondered that perhaps this could lead to increased sexual assaults? Yes, I would consider this legislation harm to society. And yet, you call yourselves the Democratic Workers' Party, yet you would rather social democracy over syndicalism. You would rather you have total control over the economy than leave the choice up to the people, or the workers, rather. So much of your hypocritical remark to live up to names. |
| Date | 22:19:08, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Libertà Parti | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | Oh, and of course, while Libertà Parti may not be pro-rights on one issue, DWP is against rights on several dozen issues. Must I remind everyone that the DWP, which claims to represent freedom and democracy, voted against guns, against private cars, against pet ownership, and against private education to list merely a few. It is the DWP that should be living up to its name. |
| Date | 22:40:39, October 04, 2007 CET | From | Democratic Workers' Party and CTUL List | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | We kindly remind the LP that it is the DWP who have been authors and key campaigners for freedom of private car ownership and pet ownership. We invite the LP to view our history of proposed legislation. On the issue of private education, we consider it neither free nor democratic to consolidate a class system by denying those of less advantaged upbringing as good an education as those whose parents can afford to pay. A mixed education system is an unequal education system. Inequality is certainly not liberating. |
| Date | 02:38:09, October 05, 2007 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | Is the Liberta Parti seriously arguing that nudity should be controlled because it might lead to more sexual assaults? To be honest - on reading that - we in the AM SuDP were convinced to switch sides on this issue. We do not want to be associated with what LOOKS like suggesting that the victims of rape are the guilty parties because they somehow 'invite' it. |
| Date | 17:57:20, October 05, 2007 CET | From | Libertà Parti | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | Clothed rape victims usually do not invite sexual assault. Unclothed ones would. |
| Date | 01:08:31, October 06, 2007 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | So - a person raped while naked... wasn't really raped at all? |
| Date | 10:29:40, October 06, 2007 CET | From | Libertà Parti | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | Oh no. They were raped. But they really shouldn't be showing their parts off to everyone; whereas the term everyone also includes sex offenders, which ought to be in prison for life (as they are the only people on the planet that cannot be rehabilitated by any means). Perhaps we should make a law to put sex offenders in prison for life. But then again, they have to make a sex offense to become a sex offender, so naked people would still be unsafe. Why do you think humanity was clothed, even in warm climates, to begin with? |
| Date | 10:39:46, October 06, 2007 CET | From | Libertà Parti | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | We will now change our vote, but will propose legislation that sex offenses receive the only exception to the ban on capital punishment. |
| Date | 16:00:03, October 06, 2007 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | The Liberta Parti are seriously holding to the 'victim causes rape' line.... that's disturbing. |
| Date | 09:06:08, October 07, 2007 CET | From | Permissive Social Union | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | If this passes, or leader Rhonda Shtuker will be attending the convication completely naked. In a statement released today she has said "You will have only yourselves to blame." |
| Date | 13:43:48, October 07, 2007 CET | From |  Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | We will now support, following the convincing argument of the LFF. |
| Date | 21:33:26, October 07, 2007 CET | From | Neue Kommunistische Liga | To | Debating the Decriminalisation of Public Exhibition Act |
| Message | I must be inclined to vote for this bill, for my beliefs are that people should not be oppressed by their government. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 303 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 99 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 264 |
| Random fact: Particracy has been running since 2005. Dorvik was Particracy's first nation, the Dorvik Social Democrats the first party and the International Greens the first Party Organisation. |
| Random quote: "A lot of people are waiting for Martin Luther King or Mahatma Gandhi to come back, but they are gone. We are it. It is up to us. It is up to you." - Marian Wright Edelman |