Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: July 4288
Next month in: 03:46:34
Server time: 04:13:25, October 17, 2017 CET
Currently online (5): alan123 | FPD | SirPotatoes | wucott2 | Zak | Record: 63 on 23:28:53, August 06, 2007 CET

Bill: Protect our Children Act

Details

Submitted by[?]: Paleofederalist 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: February 2940

Description[?]:

We wish to uphold our cherished Right to Free Speech by vigorously enforcing our laws against obscenity to maintain a degree of separation between that which is truly speech and that which only seeks to distort and destroy.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date21:59:28, May 16, 2010 CET
FromCommunist Party of Darnussia
ToDebating the Protect our Children Act
MessageWe agree with artcile 2 but not article 1:

If it is after the watershed, why on earth shouldn't programme makers be allowed to show adult content. It surely is up to the parents to make sure their children aren't watching things they believe to be inapropiate, rather than the programme makers.

Date01:16:54, May 17, 2010 CET
FromChristian Conservative Party
ToDebating the Protect our Children Act
MessageUnless, of course, the content is not appropriate for even those parents to decide.

Date03:56:27, May 17, 2010 CET
FromLibertarian Party of Darnussia
ToDebating the Protect our Children Act
Message"We wish to uphold our cherished Right to Free Speech by vigorously enforcing our laws against obscenity to maintain a degree of separation between that which is truly speech and that which only seeks to distort and destroy."

hahahahahahahah, and who exactly gets to decide what is free speech and what is just attempting to distort and destroy, I guess that would be you woudn't it.

Date07:16:06, May 17, 2010 CET
FromRerum Novarum Party
ToDebating the Protect our Children Act
MessageThe right to freedom of speech is a corrupted ideal that is used as a shroud to ignorance.

Date03:24:26, May 18, 2010 CET
FromLibertarian Party of Darnussia
ToDebating the Protect our Children Act
MessageI'm guessing that was a satirical statement?

Date12:13:56, May 18, 2010 CET
FromCommunist Party of Darnussia
ToDebating the Protect our Children Act
Message^^No, his party doesn't belive in the "rights system".

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
    

Total Seats: 101

no
   

Total Seats: 91

abstain
 

Total Seats: 23


Random fact: Treaties which have become inactive, meaning they are over 50 IG (in-game) years old and have no ratifications or are over 200 IG years old and have fewer than 2 ratifications, will be deleted. Treaties identified as inactive may be reported for deletion on the Dead Treaties thread.

Random quote: "This administration is not sympathetic to corporations; it is indentured to corporations." Ralph Nader

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 67