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: Civil Union Continuity Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Rerum Novarum 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: April 2934
Description[?]:
| Where does the crime of polygamy lie? If a man marries a woman and has sex with her; this is permissible. If a man marries a woman and has sex with her and many other women, this is also permissible. If a man has sex with multiple women and wants to call them his wives, this is illegal and we seek to persecute those who do as such. This is incoherent. If civil union is to be a contract of the state, then it aught to be upheld by the state. Take note that adultery is worded as a capital offence, but the death penalty is never to be applied because it is illegal. Therefore, the crime of adultery is punishable under the law with punishment determined by the justices based on the extent of the crimes. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy with respect to adultery.
Old value:: Adultery is legal.
Current: Adultery is illegal, but not prosecuted.
Proposed: Adultery is a capital offence.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 10:00:11, May 05, 2010 CET | From | Communist Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Civil Union Continuity Act |
| Message | Wait, I'm confused. Is this bill against adultery or polygamy? You would think adultery by looking at the proposals, but your description says adultery is permissible, while it is POLYGAMY that is wrong. Be aware they are two different things, although I'm sure you already know that. |
| Date | 15:23:41, May 05, 2010 CET | From | Rerum Novarum Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Continuity Act |
| Message | The description is blatantly against both. |
| Date | 16:59:05, May 05, 2010 CET | From | Christian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Continuity Act |
| Message | Marriage in this case is a state contract. Therefore, the state should be able to uphold punishment for the breaking of said state contract. |
| Date | 17:56:36, May 05, 2010 CET | From | Christian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Continuity Act |
| Message | Also, by referring to the poll displayed in the March 2933 article of the newspaper, the majority of Darnussia finds adultery to be a capital offence. This bill is what they want to hear. |
| Date | 03:49:54, May 06, 2010 CET | From | Libertarian Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Civil Union Continuity Act |
| Message | If the state is going to be giving priveleges to those who recieve "contracts" of marriaige by the state as opposed to those who simply consider themselves to be married, then the state has no business enforcing violations of said contracts. If a civil union was nothing more than a sort of jesture to make a marriage official, but did not in anyway whatsoever grant anything more or less to the people engaging in it, then you might have a point. But seeing as our goal is to supply freedom to people, rather than the opposite, we do not think civil unions granted by the state should even exist in the first place. It is just an unnecessary surplus of government. If people want to get married, then they should get married, it should not require any sort of "government approval". |
| Date | 04:00:40, May 06, 2010 CET | From | Libertarian Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Civil Union Continuity Act |
| Message | If the state is going to be giving priveleges to those who recieve "contracts" of marriaige by the state as opposed to those who simply consider themselves to be married, then the state has no business enforcing violations of said contracts. If a civil union was nothing more than a sort of *gesture to make a marriage official, but did not in anyway whatsoever grant anything more or less to the people engaging in it, then you might have a point. But seeing as our goal is to supply freedom to people, rather than the opposite, we do not think civil unions granted by the state should even exist in the first place. It is just an unnecessary surplus of government. If people want to get married, then they should get married, it should not require any sort of "government approval". |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 81 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 105 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 24 |
| Random fact: If you want to know how many players there are in Particracy right now, check out the Game Statistics buried at the bottom of the World Map screen. |
| Random quote: "Wherever you have an efficient government, you have a dictatorship." - Harry S. Truman |