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: Freedom of the Media
Details
Submitted by[?]: AM Radical Libertarian 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: June 2111
Description[?]:
| WHEREAS It is desirable to provide our citizens with the widest variety of viewpoints, so as to enable them to make an informed choice AND FURTHERMORE The govenrment should not be in the business of deciding what is an acceptable opinion We therefore RESOLVE that in matters of opinion, the media should be free to diseminate whatever it so desires, only in matter of fact should they be restricted, AND therefore introduce this measure to the Senate of our great land. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding regulation of media content.
Old value:: There are laws against the publication of false information and hate speech.
Current: There are laws against the publication of false information and hate speech.
Proposed: There are laws against the publication of false information; everything else may be published freely.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:28:07, September 12, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | The member from Hukatai rises to introduce a new bill. " We cannot be put into the position of determining what is an acceptable opinion for the media to hold. Our fine peolple can certainly determine right from wrong, tolerance from hatred, and fairness from bias. It is not out place to censor any ideas, no matter how hater filled we may percieve them, for without a free exchange of ideas, the intellectual marketplace cannot function" He sits to moderate applause from his back bench. |
| Date | 10:21:12, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | "We are fully supportative of this Bill, the government should no longer have the right to censor publications, no matter how intolerant they are" commented the CPL Interior Spokeswoman, Marghite Jonssen, a possible leadership contender. |
| Date | 14:17:38, September 13, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | Cries of "Here Here" are heard from the RPL |
| Date | 23:44:53, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | The AAP is torn... as we see it, "hate speech" must be, at heart, untrue... must it not? Is this not, then, redundant? |
| Date | 14:03:09, September 14, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | Not necessarily. I cna say that I would be glad if all Liberals die tomorrow, because they are a blot on the face of humanity. That is hateful but not necessarily false. If I say that all Liberals eat thier children, and therefore should die, that's false because some Liberals do not eat children. That would be actionable. |
| Date | 17:04:10, September 14, 2005 CET | From | Friendly Communist's of Likatonia | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | well i dont think there is n e difference in either of them comments. if u call people a blot on the of humanity that is false as you can not prove they are, it is just your opinion and frankly i dont want to have to read it or hear it. so by keeping media nuetral it stops fools from voicing uneducated opinions. |
| Date | 19:39:35, September 14, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | I cannot be in favour of legislation which allows people to incite others to violence against partcular groups or members of society. I am fine with insults, but not with provocative hate speech. |
| Date | 20:05:21, September 14, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | Freedom os speach is meaningless, unless the most hateful is as protected as the most benevolent. Our citizens are fully capable of deciding what is good and true, or bad and false, and do not need to be protected againis bad words, neither sex nor violence nor hate. |
| Date | 23:42:18, September 14, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | The AAP wishes this had never come to vote. In order to protect freedoms, we now have to vote in favour of a motion we consider both redundant, and, in all probability, offensive. |
| Date | 07:37:09, September 15, 2005 CET | From | Right Wing Liberals Party | To | Debating the Freedom of the Media |
| Message | What is False? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 97 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 150 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In general, role-play requires the consent of all players. |
| Random quote: "The communist revolution is the most radical rupture with traditional property relations; no wonder that its development involves the most radical rupture with traditional ideas." - Karl Marx |