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: Gambling Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM)
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: December 2937
Description[?]:
| This Act decriminalises gambling. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The right to gamble.
Old value:: Gambling is illegal unless taking place in a licensed casino.
Current: Gambling is legal, but only in private homes and casinos with special licences.
Proposed: Gambling is legal across the nation, no regulation whatsoever.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:35:55, May 12, 2010 CET | From |  Labour Party | To | Debating the Gambling Act |
| Message | Mr speaker, we disapprove. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 144 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 239 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 8 |
| Random fact: The people in your nation don't like inactive parties. When you often abstain from voting for a bill, they will dislike your party and your visibility to the electorate will decrease significantly. Low visibility will means you are likely to lose seats. So keep in mind: voting Yes or No is always better than Abstaining. |
| Random quote: "A democracy that does not allow limits is not a democracy. Just as a limitless freedom is not freedom, but prevarication. Indeed, any theory of freedom worthy of this name is first of all a limit theory. If we extend the unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not willing to defend a tolerant society against the attacks of the intolerants, then the tolerants will be destroyed and the tolerance with them! Because, I ask to myself and ask you, given a certain system that we call democratic, which is today the best possible system to allow everyone to live freely and to be able to express their own thoughts, how can the same system admit attacks against its integrity? How can a system refuse the principle of the self-preservation? For this reason, to suppress the apologetics of thalerrism, it's for this reason that the exaltation of exegetes, principles, facts or methods of Thallerism and its anti-democratic aims does not constitute a violation of the freedom of manifestation of thought, but, on the contrary, the celebration of that freedom. The protection of the first premise on which a modern democratic system is based. And this premise must be safeguarded also and above all against itself and its abuses." ~ Malik Astori, Leadership of Liberty and Progress (Istalia) |