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: Revised Moral Decency Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: National Populist 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: January 2722
Description[?]:
| We agree with many of the Borosian proposals in their Moral Decency Act, but not their divorce article. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National policy regarding the desecration of the national flag.
Old value:: There are no regulations regarding the desecration or use of the national flag.
Current: The national flag may not be desecrated or dishonoured.
Proposed: The national flag may not be desecrated or dishonoured.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Displays of public affection and obscenity laws.
Old value:: There are no laws regarding obscene public acts.
Current: There are no laws regarding obscene public acts.
Proposed: All sexually implicit actions are illegal in public.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The time at which sexually explicit content may be shown on broadcast television (if allowed).
Old value:: Sexually explicit content may be shown all day long.
Current: Sexually explicit content or nudity may only be shown during hours that very few children watch television
Proposed: Sexually explicit content or nudity may only be shown during hours that very few children watch television
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 07:27:56, March 06, 2009 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the Revised Moral Decency Act |
| Message | We would possibly understand prohibiting sexually explicit actions in public, but sexually implicit things? At an extreme, a couple holding hands could be prosecuted under such a provision, because their holding hands might be interpreted as implicitily hinting a a potential sexual relationship between the two. |
| Date | 15:03:56, March 06, 2009 CET | From | New Whig Party | To | Debating the Revised Moral Decency Act |
| Message | Did you mix up implicit with explicit, or do you really mean that? |
| Date | 18:48:11, March 06, 2009 CET | From | National Populist Party | To | Debating the Revised Moral Decency Act |
| Message | Under this bill, it will be illegal for couples to commit any sexual actions in public. There would be no punishment for holding hands or kissing. Sexual caresses, sexual touching, oral and normal sex and the like would be banned from public. This is for the children of our nation, and for the morals. The National Populist Party is all for civil rights and public displays of affection, but not at the expense of our morals and our children's growth. We urge the PSD to see our point of view. |
| Date | 21:50:58, March 06, 2009 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the Revised Moral Decency Act |
| Message | We would regard what the NPP is talking about as explicit sexualised behaviour, while this bill bans actions that only implicate sexual acts. Our point therefore stands. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 378 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 372 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Selucia is Particracy's modern take on Ancient Rome, located on the continent of Majatra. |
| Random quote: "You can't give the government the power to do good without also giving it the power to do bad, in fact, to do anything it wants." - Harry Browne |