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: Defense Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Berosian Party
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: March 2614
Description[?]:
| Article 1 emphasizes that if our nation is attacked first, we are already behind. We must allow for our nation to strike first. Article 2 attempts to distinuish between a term in the military in peacetime and in wartime. In wartime, serving in the military is dangerous, and our citizens should not be forced to do anything dangerous. In peacetime, a term in the military is completely safe, teaches self-discipline and pride, and is a good way to learn to appreciate our nation. "War is not something I advocate. But if the case arises, we must be willing to fight our enemies and to show them that we mean business. Regulations against our fighting men and women only aids our enemies. Our enemies will not show us any mercy. We should return the favour." Victor Baker Minister of Defense Member of the Berosian Party |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of chemical and biological weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Current: The nation reserves the right to use chemical or biological weapons in warfare for any reason.
Proposed: The nation can only use chemical or biological weapons on non-civilan areas.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Current: There shall be no mandatory military or civilian national service.
Proposed: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:18:25, July 29, 2008 CET | From | Traditional Conservative Party | To | Debating the Defense Act |
| Message | We cannot support article 2. We believe it should actually be taken further the opposite way. |
| Date | 22:40:37, July 29, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Defense Act |
| Message | The TCP believes we should have mandatory service? A draft, in Likatonia? Who are we supposed to be at war against? |
| Date | 22:43:30, July 29, 2008 CET | From | Berosian Party | To | Debating the Defense Act |
| Message | While Article 2 seems to be taking it to more extremes, it is the views of the Berosian Party that it is taking it back. Under current legislation, citizens are being forced to die for their country, something no person should be forced to do. Under the proposed legislation, they are merely providing a safe civil service or a safe term in the military for a short period of time, for which they are compensated. The Berosian Party sees this term in the same light as mandatory schooling, the only difference being that in the military our citizens are learning to be more self-disciplined, to have more pride in their country, and are learning more about the world in a completely new way, by seeing it firsthand, whereas in schooling, they are learning none of these things. These are essential things that all citizens should learn, and they are learning them in a safe environment. |
| Date | 22:48:02, July 29, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Defense Act |
| Message | Innocent Immeressen made the following statement, before the Convocation: "We believe that the Berosian party are, unfortunately, talking rubbish. They harp on about teaching people to be proud of their country, to have self-discipline, to elarn more about the world - and then they say that no one should be expected to die for his or her country. How can you reconcile that? How can you claim to be building essential values of patriotism and awareness of the good and bad of existence... and then NOT expect people to fight for those values? We find this a hypocritical position." |
| Date | 23:02:19, July 29, 2008 CET | From | Berosian Party | To | Debating the Defense Act |
| Message | Minister of Defense Victor Baker followed the comments made by Innocente Immeressen: "The Berosians have for years attempted to instill national pride and freedom into our nation. We have passed bills outlawing the descecration of our flag, we have passed bills strenthening our military, making it a source of great pride in our nation and having it do the best job possible of protecting the freedoms of our nation; freedoms the Berosians have fought hard to give our citizens by passing bills giving them more civil liberties. Our people are a proud people. We do expect our people to fight for their values. We do expect our people will be willing to die for their freedoms. We merely do not want to force them to. That, ladies and gentlemen of the Convocation, would be 'a hypocritical position'." |
| Date | 23:28:28, July 29, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Defense Act |
| Message | Innocente Immeressen issued the folowing response: "The hypocrisy is in pretending to be in favour of civil rights, whilst at the same time claiming 'victory' in supression of free speech'. If we are the only party that sees a conflict there, we despair for Likatonia. Luckily, we believe that the Likatonian people are seeing through these ruses of the Berosians and their kind. We expect the people to offer you their response, fairly soon.. this election or the next. What our people NEED is peace. We've had wars in Likatonia - and it's never done us a bit of good. We need to reduce our military presence. We need to increase our domestic civil rights. In other words, we need the Berosian Party back on the backbenches, where they belong." |
| Date | 05:15:58, July 30, 2008 CET | From | Red Tory Party | To | Debating the Defense Act |
| Message | "Our citizens want freedom. Our citizens wish to be able to control their own lives. We know this by taking a small glance back at our most recent election. Likatonians are tired of their old, oppressive, out-dated government, and are ready for change. Civil rights will shower down upon our nationals in ways they have not seen in decades. The time for a new Likatonia has arrived. The bill before us today is one of excellence. Our people need to know that their government can protect them. We cannot wait until the SuDP is 'back on the backbenches, where they belong.'" Tyler MacNeill, Leader of the Red Tory Party |
| Date | 05:40:57, July 30, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Defense Act |
| Message | Innocente Immeressen issued the folowing response: "Our citizens had freedom. This nation has been a socially liberated paradise for centuries. It is true that corporate interests were less 'free', but that is hardly a bad thing. In Likatonia, the government AND industry serviced the needs of the people. In this 'New' Likatonia, the people are being told they are pawns in a game of economic monopolies. The Red Tories may describe the old Likatonia as oppressive - but it's this new batch of parties that has tried to rob civil right after civil right from the people. The Red Tories describe the 'old' government as out dated, but it is this new batch of parties that has been reaching back into ancient history to re-enact laws long sice repealed, that limited freedoms, and allowed discrimination. We are curious about the bedfellows the Red Tories choose, if they honestly believe that 'civil rights will shower down upon our nationals' - by far the most socially permissive party in Likatonia is the AM SuDP, and yet - the Red Tories form a political alliance instead with avowed social regressives. Either the Red Tories are being less than honest about their intentions, or they have formed a pact with the devi for a little bit of power in the Convocation. You can wait for us to return to the backbenches, Mr MacNeill - but I wouldn't hold my breath, if I were you. Likatonians have never liked the sort of political shenanigans we're seeing from this 'new government', and they'll reject you." |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 342 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 206 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 118 |
| Random fact: Selucia is Particracy's modern take on Ancient Rome, located on the continent of Majatra. |
| Random quote: "Civil disobedience. . . is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is that numbers of people all over the world have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience. . Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war, and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, and all the while the grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem." - Howard Zinn |