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: Protection of Borders Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Free Reform Coalition (FRP)
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: October 2047
Description[?]:
| Our country must aid all refugees who need our help, however we must ensure that they are registered with the government in the interest of security. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The national refugee policy.
Old value:: All refugees are welcome, regardless of their reason, and given aid in integrating them into the country.
Current: All refugees are welcome, regardless of their reason, and given aid in integrating them into the country.
Proposed: Only refugees that are victims of extreme circumstances are welcome; no aid is given to them.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:44:28, May 01, 2005 CET | From |  Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | The wording of the proposal implies that the FRP does not want to offer support to refugees. This is not the case. The FRP merely wants to ensure the security of our population from potential threats made by criminals claiming to be refugees. The aim is a simple registration policy whereby refugees can successfully integrate themselves into society. |
| Date | 01:34:18, May 02, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | Racism masquerading as security, I'll have a double! This is deplorable and if the FRP had a conscience we're sure they would feel a deep sense of shame in their cold, lifeless hearts. |
| Date | 05:33:03, May 02, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | Well, if you bothered to read what we wrote you'd see that we have no problem with refugees coming into the country. What is your obsession with racism LevP? we never even mentioned race, and since when does being a refugee imply being of another race? This is an assumption that the LevP has made, not the FRP. |
| Date | 07:28:31, May 02, 2005 CET | From | Social Republican Party | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | We agree. They should have to go through the officail channels. Why does the LevP want to avoid knowing why these people are in our nation? |
| Date | 07:48:27, May 02, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | Official channels is code for all number of restrictions designed to keep refugees out. Libertarians always get nervous when the government starts asking the 'why' question when it comes to their internet usage, reading lists and so on, and with good reason: when the government starts peeping into our lives, no matter how well intentioned, it always ends badly. The same goes for immigration. So now we want to turn away refugees, send them home and make them fill out forms in triplicate? Hold them in detention centers while the paperwork is processed? And then, we start turning people away, slowly closing our borders and our nation from those most in need. We're not talking about just random people looking for a new place to live, though we dont particarly object to them immigrating to Malivia either. We're talking about refugees, fleeing oppression and genocide, and you want to put up barriers to gaining asylum? There is no reason for us to deny anyone refuge in our nation, and thus no reason to estabish the labyrinth of regulations on who we do and don't let in. |
| Date | 08:26:55, May 02, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | So has the LevP become libertarian, or is it only taking up the cause when it suits its populist agenda? The FRP never mentioned monitoring of internet usage, nor did it mention deliberative and long processes of entry into the country. We are talking about a simple process of identity registration and confirmation to assess any threats. The "why" reason is also important, there are some instances in which people claim refugee status because it is faster than the immigration process or they are criminals escaping from their country. While the FRP maintains that the refugee process should be faster than the immigration process, it should still be regulated to ensure that we are not letting in threats to our sovereignty nor immigrants who want to get in the easy way. Considering the fact that we will be supporting refugees economically (assuming a natural disaster and they have nothing etc.) this is a legitimate concern. Here is an analogy of what the process will be like; In America it takes 3-5 days to do an FBI background check on a person before buying a gun. The refugee process should take about the same time to check their status in other countries and to compare their photograph to that of known terrorists and criminals. The technology exists to do this properly and quickly. |
| Date | 20:39:37, May 02, 2005 CET | From | LibCom Party | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | We've been over this before, and the LCP is still against this xenophobia. Why should refugees be subject to security measures that don't apply to people born here? |
| Date | 21:51:55, May 02, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | What is this America you keep mentioning? Is it from a book or something? |
| Date | 01:25:42, May 03, 2005 CET | From | Social Republican Party | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | OOC LevP, we need something to base bearucracy speeds and such off of. |
| Date | 01:27:38, May 03, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | We've just realized why LevP never backs up its claims: the real world doesn't exist in their mind! |
| Date | 07:47:20, May 05, 2005 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | OOC: Agreeing with SRP, Lev the same can be said for any comment you have made (such as the research in behavior and teaching etc), at some point references must be brought into the debate. |
| Date | 07:58:53, May 05, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | ooc: here's the thing about 'research,' and i put it in quotes because i'm really dubious of a lot of people out there: it's dependant upon context. Malivia is NOT America, or the UK, or any other country, and what goes there may not go here. don't expect me to be swayed because something may or may not be in RL, especially since i could refute all the claims made point for point if, you know, i had no life and was willing to go do hours of research for a GAME. |
| Date | 11:02:22, May 05, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | OOC: LevP, if you are going to argue a point, it is fine and wonderful to use a theoretical basis for it. However, when history and evidence has shown that the argument doesn't stand up to reality, what makes you think its going to work again? Its like saying "communism only killed 100 million people, let's give it another shot!" to quote an amusing website. In other words, you shouldn't disregard evidence to support a theory that sounds 'nice.' As the context of the evidence that people put forward, well, its certainly possible to insert a link to the website, so everyone can check its veracity and decide for themselves. And if you can refute the arguments point for point, why don't you? because up till now, it seems like you're being irrationally stuck to your own personal agenda. we honor the ability of others to present conflicting and true evidence against an argument. Also, research doesn't take that long, especially if you are using google. thats always a good starting point. |
| Date | 01:54:00, May 06, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | ooc: capitalism kills 11 million people a year from starvation, so figure that out. doublethink duckspeak ++good, fucker. |
| Date | 11:01:41, May 06, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Protection of Borders Act |
| Message | Ah yes, the standard resort of the LevP: When they can't come up with an argument, insult the opposition. OOC: Do you do this to your students when they disagree with you too? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 10 | |||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 90 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: "Kubrk" is a Jelbic word that has the colloquial meaning "old man" or "geezer". |
| Random quote: "Abolition of a woman's right to abortion, when and if she wants it, amounts to compulsory maternity: a form of rape by the State." - Edward Abbey |