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: Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Order Of The Illuminati
Status[?]: defeated
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: January 2503
Description[?]:
| It is proposed that there be no criminal sanctions against any persons who use dead humans (corpses) or aborted fetuses for food, sexual gratification, science or social experiments, for herein and ever after; and that the use of human corpses in the making of processed food products (soylent green) be, for herein and ever after, also allowed. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:44:40, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Saiserist League | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | "Such defilement of human bodies cannor be allowed without their express permission before the time of death, whcih I highly doubt many would give. The same applies to aborted fetuses without the express permission of the mother. You at the ELF are a bunch of sick freaks, you are aware of that, right?" -Natasha Danielovich Feterokov, Undersecretary of the Revolutionary Socialist Party |
| Date | 15:06:44, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Order Of The Illuminati | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | How do you know individual persons would not consent to such "defilement?" Every day, people consent to being pickled and preserved by chemicals, buried in the dirt, carved up for medical purposes, or burned to ash. What we are proposing is simply an extension of this field by saying that all actions taken with human corpses should not be seen as criminal or immoral. All humans need to eat, and in a world in which species are going extinct and crops collapse due to drought, does it not stand to reason that fresh corpses used as food could solve a lot of ecological problems? Do not let your archaic conservative morality stand in the way of progress, comrades. |
| Date | 17:23:51, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Irish Party | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | Do we even have to give a case to backup our reasons for voting no? I hope not. |
| Date | 21:13:47, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Saiserist League | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | Finally, a bill so repulsive that it can unite all parties, right and left... |
| Date | 01:03:28, December 18, 2007 CET | From | Order Of The Illuminati | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | Jonathan Swift writes all of our policies. |
| Date | 01:31:46, December 18, 2007 CET | From | Saiserist League | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | The ELF is aware that Jonathan Swift was being satirical when he advocated eating children to solve starvation in Ireland, right? |
| Date | 01:48:56, December 18, 2007 CET | From | Order Of The Illuminati | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | Really? Gosh, we had no idea. |
| Date | 01:53:13, December 18, 2007 CET | From | Saiserist League | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | Sarcasm not appreciated. 1. Don't put down resolutions that are this ridiculous, and this disgusting. 2. It's generally unwise to draft a manifesto based on 'A Modest Proposal'. |
| Date | 02:03:46, December 18, 2007 CET | From | Order Of The Illuminati | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | The sarcasm was not intended to offend. 1. We will put forward any proposals we feel have merit according to our perspectives, regardless of how others may react. We wish to encourage a free exchange of ideas, and may, from time to time, make proposals or arguments that seem to others heretical, offensive, lacking in merit, or non-serious in nature. Our raison d'etre is to encourage people to think about things in new ways, and to challenge conventional modes of ideation. 2. It was a bill, not a manifesto. What exactly makes it "unwise?" In confronting peoples' beliefs and prejudices in novel or provocative ways, we feel we are perhaps revealing hidden wisdoms. |
| Date | 02:11:57, December 18, 2007 CET | From | Saiserist League | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | The ELF's progressive ideals are commendable, however change for change's sake is usually unwise. Change always happens, but there is always a guiding reason behind the change. The ELF should think about more important, and more substantial, issues to make in the opinion of the ZRSP. Fighting over the right to consume and molest corpses is not a rational way to make a principled stand. Also, has the ELF really thought through the enormity of what it is proposing? In answer to the ELF's question, we are stating that it is unwise to make a serious proposition based on satire. A free flow of ideas is available and always appreciated, but this proposal truly defies the rational, the ethical, the humanity. |
| Date | 02:28:04, December 18, 2007 CET | From | Order Of The Illuminati | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | Let us leave aside the issue of "molesting corpses," and look solely at the issue of cannibalism. To quote from our primary argument above: "Every day, people consent to being pickled and preserved by chemicals, buried in the dirt, carved up for medical purposes, or burned to ash." We humans already accept a variety of strange rituals following death: we pickle Lenin and put him on display, we burn corpses on pyres on the Ganges, yet cannibalism remains taboo. Humans regularly hunt, kill and feast on the flesh of other dead animals, practices that vegans look upon as barbaric.. If we confront a hunger crisis due to overpopulation or ecological disaster, is it rational to continue the social taboo against eating other humans? Cannibalism is evident in human history in a wide variety of cultures, usually in situations of desperation or scarcity. I certainly do not see a huge leap from (a) current post-death practices and (b) the consumption of animal flesh to (c) cannibalism. |
| Date | 03:36:52, December 18, 2007 CET | From | Saiserist League | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | As repulsive as it may be, the ZRSP has no problem, in principle, of such post-mortem cannibalism. However, people remain masters of their own person and such a practice would require the permission, expressly given and documented, before death, and this is not given in the resolution. |
| Date | 09:32:17, December 18, 2007 CET | From | National Authoritarian Movement | To | Debating the Cannibalism & Necrophilia Act |
| Message | Welcome back to the Stone Age! This resolution tries to throw away thousand years of higher culture. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | |||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 333 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy allows you to establish an unelected head of state like a monarch or a president-for-life, but doing this is a bit of a process. First elect a candidate with the name "." to the Head of State position. Then change your law on the "Structure of the executive branch" to "The head of state is hereditary and symbolic; the head of government chairs the cabinet" and change the "formal title of the head of state" to how you want the new head of state's title and name to appear (eg. King Percy XVI). |
| Random quote: "If man asks for many laws, it is only because he is sure that his neighbor needs them; privately he is an unphilosophical anarchist, and thinks laws in his own case superfluous." - Will Durant |