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: Military Service Act 2634
Details
Submitted by[?]: Wiedervereinigten Nationalisten
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 2634
Description[?]:
| An Act to amend the military service code to remove restrictions on recruitment. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Military stance on homosexuality.
Old value:: Open homosexuality is not tolerated in the military. The military has a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Current: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Proposed: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Women in the military.
Old value:: Women can only serve in non-battle positions.
Current: Women serve alongside men.
Proposed: Women serve in segregated units.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 02:36:59, September 08, 2008 CET | From |  Republican Coalition | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | Support second, oppose first. This will only solve towards distraction and as such a loss of effectivness in the military. |
| Date | 03:21:56, September 08, 2008 CET | From | Wiedervereinigten Nationalisten | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | "It's absolutely ridiculous to assert that open homosexuality is any more of a distraction in the military than open heterosexuality. There is absolutely no reason to deny homosexual Hulstrians the right to serve His Imperial Majesty and their country in the armed forces. I would have thought that the 'progressive' Patriciate Coalition would refrain from such childish arguments in support of discrimination." -Nicolaas van der Burgh Chairman of the HNP DM for Graaffsberg South HNP Spokesman on Finance |
| Date | 04:12:15, September 08, 2008 CET | From | Traditional Conservative's Party | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | We support both proposed articles fully. |
| Date | 14:44:59, September 08, 2008 CET | From | Republican Coalition | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | Of course it's as much of a distraction, that is why women serve in segregated units, so that they are not a distraction and both can act effectively without such distractions. Open heterosexuality has no effect in such segregated units. Open homosexuality however, can make heterosexuals uncomfortable and distract homosexuals from the line of duty. Support one or the other, supporting both just doesn't make sense. |
| Date | 22:45:21, September 08, 2008 CET | From | Wiedervereinigten Nationalisten | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | "The idea that a professional soldier cannot distinguish between what is appropriate and what is not appropriate is ridiculous. There are homosexuals in the military already. The only difference is that current policy forces excellent, professional soldiers to be discharged for a simple slip of the tongue about who they are. Which is ridiculous." -Nicolaas van der Burgh Chairman of the HNP DM for Graaffsberg South HNP Spokesman on Finance |
| Date | 23:30:20, September 08, 2008 CET | From | Republican Coalition | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | The average citizen is not expected to distinguish between what is appropriate according to the HNP's own manifesto, banning displays of public effection beyond a certain point. Why should soldiers be any better? |
| Date | 01:27:40, September 09, 2008 CET | From | Wiedervereinigten Nationalisten | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | "This bill is not meant to legalise sex between two soldiers, particularly while on duty. This bill is meant to remove the insane restrictions on homosexuals serving in our armed forces." -Nicolaas van der Burgh Chairman of the HNP DM for Graaffsberg South HNP Spokesman on Finance |
| Date | 03:01:52, September 09, 2008 CET | From | Republican Coalition | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | Distraction and action are two very different things, if this bill were to pass, the first would be rampant and the second more likely |
| Date | 03:11:22, September 09, 2008 CET | From | Wiedervereinigten Nationalisten | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | "I would challenge the honourable gentleman to present evidence that this would in any way cause such grievous 'distractions' as to merit both the continuation of discriminatory policies and the practical effects of this policy, namely the loss of skilled, trained soldiers because they happen to be homosexual." -Nicolaas van der Burgh Chairman of the HNP DM for Graaffsberg South HNP Spokesman on Finance |
| Date | 03:36:09, September 09, 2008 CET | From | Republican Coalition | To | Debating the Military Service Act 2634 |
| Message | They are not lost, they may enter the military. They are simply requested not to share their sexuality with other soldiers. They do not need to do so, under any situation in their jobs, and so it should be a fairly simple request. The distraction emerges with soldiers who are uncomfortable with serving alongside others who may harbour sexual feelings for them, a feeling which is shared in heterosexual situations, and why women should serve in segregated units. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 257 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 246 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 147 |
| Random fact: Before creating a party organisation, check to see whether there are any existing organisations which cover the same agenda. |
| Random quote: “Human rights means doing whatever the fuck you want” - Benji Benandez, former Dranian politician |