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: Rainbow Inclusiveness Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Islamic Nationalist 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: October 2118
Description[?]:
| A BILL to extend civil marriage contracts to all couples. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy toward marriage.
Old value:: The government only recognises civil marriages between a man and a woman.
Current: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Proposed: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:23:17, September 28, 2005 CET | From |  Islamic Nationalist Front | To | Debating the Rainbow Inclusiveness Act |
| Message | (Ok, ok. I just couldn't help myself when it came to the name xD) |
| Date | 13:12:32, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Nudist Party of United Jakania | To | Debating the Rainbow Inclusiveness Act |
| Message | The Nudist Party disagrees with the proposed amendment on the grounds that it violates our moral view of marriage as defined by the Christian faith. The Nudist Party will not support this measure in any way. While we accept that a person may choose a same sex relationship, we do not agree that such relationships should be officially sanctioned under the terms "marriage" |
| Date | 14:59:42, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Islamic Nationalist Front | To | Debating the Rainbow Inclusiveness Act |
| Message | (HONESTLY now, you have to be one of the most socially conservative nudists I have ever met. Of course, I'm assuming that's your intention.) |
| Date | 15:03:39, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Islamic Nationalist Front | To | Debating the Rainbow Inclusiveness Act |
| Message | The Jakanian Libertarian party requests the support of the Bolshikstan Party, the Union of Leftist Thinkers, the Jakanian Liberal Socialists, and the Free Republicans in passing this bill. |
| Date | 15:58:14, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Jakanian Liberal Socialists | To | Debating the Rainbow Inclusiveness Act |
| Message | The JSLP will back this proposal in its current form. However, while we believe that any consenting adults should be able to join in civil partnerships or marriage, obtain the same legal statuses as heterosexual couples, and celebrate their joining in any fasion or ceremony they choose to, it does believe that church denominations should not be forced to perform these marriages if they believe it violates their religion. (But as the game mechanics aren't as diverse in this issue, we're happy with this ^^ ) |
| Date | 02:21:59, September 29, 2005 CET | From | Jakanian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Rainbow Inclusiveness Act |
| Message | The Free Republicans will oppose this, no matter what. |
| Date | 06:11:05, September 29, 2005 CET | From | Nudist Party of United Jakania | To | Debating the Rainbow Inclusiveness Act |
| Message | The NP joins the FRP in standing against this legislation. It undermines the core of our nation, which is and always must be, the family. |
| Date | 06:40:52, September 29, 2005 CET | From | Union of Leftist Thinkers | To | Debating the Rainbow Inclusiveness Act |
| Message | The Union of Leftist Thinkers offers its full and unequivical support for this bill. To not allow homosexuals to marry is discrimination, plain and simple. |
| Date | 07:47:38, September 29, 2005 CET | From | Jakanian Liberal Socialists | To | Debating the Rainbow Inclusiveness Act |
| Message | (This'll be an interesting vote... ^^) |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 40 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 28 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 32 |
| Random fact: Players have a responsibility to differentiate between OOC (out-of-character) and IC (in-character) behaviour, and to make clear when they are communicating in OOC or IC terms. Since Particracy is a role-playing game, IC excesses are generally fine, but OOC attacks are not. However, players must not presume this convention permits them to harass a player with IC remarks that have a clear OOC context. |
| Random quote: "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius, and a lot of courage, to move in the opposite direction." - Albert Einstein |