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: Definition of Marriage Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Christian Federalist Party
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: September 2535
Description[?]:
| We must affirm the tradition of marriage as between a man and a woman. Calling anything else "marriage" renders the term meaningless. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy toward marriage.
Old value:: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Current: The government does not involve itself in marriage or civil unions.
Proposed: The government only recognises civil marriages between a man and a woman.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:08:47, February 20, 2008 CET | From |  Rewolucyjna Partia Socjalistyczna | To | Debating the Definition of Marriage Act |
| Message | Civil marriage! What churches do is none of our concern; if they operate as private organisations without any sort of state assistance, they can be as discriminatory as they like. But the state should recognise civil unions or "common-law" marriages for any consenting adults. |
| Date | 23:28:42, February 20, 2008 CET | From | Gilded Rose Party | To | Debating the Definition of Marriage Act |
| Message | The state should have nothing to do with marriage - I don't understand why people think it is the governments job to bind to people together emotionally? It would be like the state forcing people to make a contract every time they have a child, or have sex, or talk to someone. State marriage is one of the most ridiculous things I can think of. |
| Date | 06:06:00, February 21, 2008 CET | From | People's Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Definition of Marriage Act |
| Message | What kind of f***ery is this. I will never ever ever ever support this attack on gay rights. |
| Date | 09:55:07, February 21, 2008 CET | From | National Liberal League | To | Debating the Definition of Marriage Act |
| Message | I could never support this under any circumstance. |
| Date | 03:36:22, February 22, 2008 CET | From | Christian Federalist Party | To | Debating the Definition of Marriage Act |
| Message | As a society we ought to be able to say that marriage is between a man and a women. If you allow the door to be open for homosexuals then you allow it to be open to everyone. Three or four people could 'marry' each other. The case needs to be made in favor of homosexual marriage and it has not been made. The government is involved in heterosexual marriage because heterosexual couples produce children and thus this is a concern of the state. As a general rule, homosexuals do not. This bill just reasserts the traditional view. If you think the tradition is suspect just because it is tradition, you have taken the wrong position. |
| Date | 05:30:24, February 22, 2008 CET | From | National Liberal League | To | Debating the Definition of Marriage Act |
| Message | "If you allow the door to be open for homosexuals then you allow it to be open to everyone." Why? What country that has legalized same-sex marriage has had all of these crazy other marriages? There's nothing to back it up.... and I guess I see gay people as people, deserving of human rights. Crazy me. Producing children is not a state concern, since there is no requirement for married couples to have children, as in, couples who do not produce childrens' marriages are not annulled, and infertile couples would still be allowed to marry. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 143 | |||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 307 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players are expected to behave in a courteous, co-operative manner and make a reasonable effort to act with the consent of all players involved, even where the rules do not make consent strictly necessary. In particular, players have a responsibility to take reasonable care that other players are not misinformed either about the role-play or the Game Rules. |
| Random quote: "Africa is poor because its investors and its creditors are unspeakably rich" - Naomi Klein |