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: Educational Child Abuse Prevention Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: National Front
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: September 2114
Description[?]:
| Resolved: the abuse of children by teachers is bad. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The teacher's right to discipline children.
Old value:: Teachers may use corporal punishment at their discretion.
Current: Discipline levels are set by local governments.
Proposed: Teachers are forbidden from striking children and may only use non-contact discipline (detention, expulsion etc).
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:26:05, September 19, 2005 CET | From | New Passive Militarist Party | To | Debating the Educational Child Abuse Prevention Act |
| Message | We agree with the resolution in the description, and perhaps, it is about time that violence be banned from the classroom. The PMP shall support this. |
| Date | 20:58:49, September 19, 2005 CET | From | National Front | To | Debating the Educational Child Abuse Prevention Act |
| Message | We are thankful for your support. Once a few more parties comment, I shall put this to vote. |
| Date | 02:09:15, September 20, 2005 CET | From | Free Capitalist Coalition | To | Debating the Educational Child Abuse Prevention Act |
| Message | While contact punishment is normally unneeded, we would prefer to keep a teacher's options open should they need to correct a severe problem NOW, without having to go through the proceedure for expulsion, or if a certain child ignores all other forms of punishment. We will not support this bill. |
| Date | 03:08:23, September 20, 2005 CET | From | National Front | To | Debating the Educational Child Abuse Prevention Act |
| Message | The teacher could always sent the child to the principal's office. |
| Date | 07:24:14, September 20, 2005 CET | From | New Passive Militarist Party | To | Debating the Educational Child Abuse Prevention Act |
| Message | There is really no reason why a teacher, someone her/his parents barely know, should be allowed to strike a student. Should said student become uncontrollable through traditional non-violent discipline (e.g., time-outs, detention, names on the board, dunce-caps, writing 100(0) repetitive sentences, copying the Dictionary verbatim, etc.), then (s)he could be sent to the principal's office, parents notified, and/or be assigned Saturday School. The point here is that we are trying to train children to partake in our democratic society and wonton physical force exercised by teachers who have nothing but tenure to assure their positions within our schools is completely counterproductive to this particular endeavour. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 308 | ||||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 77 |
| Random fact: Jelbic = "Group of cultures with an overall Central Asian/Eurasian steppe theme, using a fictional language developed specifically for Particracy". |
| Random quote: "We never know the worth of water 'til the well is dry." - Thomas Fuller |