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: Freedom of Speech Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Libertario Aliatu
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: April 2818
Description[?]:
. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding regulation of media content.
Old value:: There are laws against the publication of false information and hate speech.
Current: There are laws against the publication of false information; everything else may be published freely.
Proposed: There are no content regulations; the media may publish anything, even proven falsehoods.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Application of libel and slander laws.
Old value:: Libel and slander laws apply to and may be applied by all individuals.
Current: Libel and slander laws apply to and may be applied by all individuals.
Proposed: Private individuals are exempt from libel and slander suits by public figures.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 19:31:43, September 13, 2009 CET | From | Partido Unionista | To | Debating the Freedom of Speech Act |
Message | Why should the media be able to publish anything they like without regard for the consequences? Why shouldn't they have to back up what are sometimes absurd claims? |
Date | 19:43:10, September 13, 2009 CET | From | Libertario Aliatu | To | Debating the Freedom of Speech Act |
Message | Because their right to say that is balanced by the right of the rest of the public to ignore them. |
Date | 19:54:38, September 13, 2009 CET | From | Partido Unionista | To | Debating the Freedom of Speech Act |
Message | The damage that can be done to a persons reputation and a persons wellbeing is irreversible once false claims are made about them regardless of whether people ignore it or not. People shouldn't just be able to say whatever they want about anyone with nothing to back it up with just for the sake of it. For example, what if someone gets accused of a murder or similar serious crime and there is nothing to back it up with, just what ever the author decides to put? Despite having nothing to do with the crime, it could affect the person for the rest of there life. If they have no way to sue the author, then the author could just say what ever they wanted about who ever they wanted without having to worry about the consequences. |
Date | 00:13:15, September 14, 2009 CET | From | Gaduridos National Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Speech Act |
Message | We feel it necessary to maintain a level of control over what content the media contains, the government would be a likely loser were this to pass. |
Date | 16:43:00, September 14, 2009 CET | From | Libertario Aliatu | To | Debating the Freedom of Speech Act |
Message | We agree with the Unionist Party and believe that murder should be decriminalised in order to make sure that this never happens. |
Date | 16:49:43, September 14, 2009 CET | From | Cult of Death | To | Debating the Freedom of Speech Act |
Message | The media should be strictly controlled to maintain the spiritual health of the nation |
Date | 21:48:24, September 14, 2009 CET | From | Partido Democratico Social | To | Debating the Freedom of Speech Act |
Message | Okay...it's official, the CoD scares us. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||
yes |
Total Seats: 151 | ||||
no |
Total Seats: 354 | ||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: To see what other nations are up to and to actively involve yourself in international activities: check the Roleplaying section on the forum! Don't be shy to make a news post about your party's recent achievements. |
Random quote: "It makes no difference, in principle, if this 'collective will' is divined by the edicts of a dictator or by majority vote, so long as the rights of the individual may still be sacrificed." - Robert Garmong |