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: The Free Sex Proposition
Details
Submitted by[?]: Crimson Moon 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: November 2718
Description[?]:
| Prostitution is a field of work. You are providing a service for people and recieving pay. This bill proposes the government recognise that. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The right for a person to prostitute himself or herself.
Old value:: There is a state monopoly on prostitution.
Current: Prostitution is illegal.
Proposed: Prostitution is legal and a recognized profession.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:32:19, February 27, 2009 CET | From |  Iqembu Sokusebenzisana Yeningi | To | Debating the The Free Sex Proposition |
| Message | Provisionally voting against, but we will be checking the debate on this bill and may be persuaded to change our vote. |
| Date | 17:37:18, February 27, 2009 CET | From | Bicky Forever - MSCC | To | Debating the The Free Sex Proposition |
| Message | Same reasoning as CCC. |
| Date | 18:25:44, February 27, 2009 CET | From | Crimson Moon Party | To | Debating the The Free Sex Proposition |
| Message | I ask you: Why should the state have a monopoly on prostitution as opposed to everything else? Why can't prostitution be a normal career choice? A monopoly seems senseless. It's just another excuse for the government to make more money off the people. |
| Date | 19:05:07, February 27, 2009 CET | From | Bicky Forever - MSCC | To | Debating the The Free Sex Proposition |
| Message | The monopoly on prostitution was created because in that scenario, the prostitutes' rights could be guaranteed best. |
| Date | 02:53:09, February 28, 2009 CET | From | Federal Capitalist Union (CC-DMF) | To | Debating the The Free Sex Proposition |
| Message | Then licence it, it doesn't need to be a monopoly. |
| Date | 05:39:57, February 28, 2009 CET | From | Crimson Moon Party | To | Debating the The Free Sex Proposition |
| Message | We agree with the previous statement |
| Date | 09:13:27, February 28, 2009 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the The Free Sex Proposition |
| Message | We don't. The activities of the government are always open to public scrutiny and democratic accountability. Private organisations are not. Private licensing would be a less effective manner of achieving the objective of ensuring both the safety and the dignity of prostitutes and the general interests of public health. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 620 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 80 |
| Random fact: Unless otherwise stated, monarchs and their royal houses will be presumed to be owned by the player who introduced the bill appointing them to their position. |
| Random quote: "Let's call the drug war what it is, ethnic cleansing of Americans." - Jello Biafra |