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: Marriage and Divorce Act of 2944
Details
Submitted by[?]: Socialist Party of Indrala (社會黨 )
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: May 2945
Description[?]:
| ... |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The legality of divorces (if marriages are recognised).
Old value:: Divorces are only legal with mutual consent.
Current: Divorces are legal, be it mutual consent, grounded cause or if one partner wants it.
Proposed: Divorces are legal, be it mutual consent, grounded cause or if one partner wants it.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the initiation of divorces (if allowed).
Old value:: Only male partners may initiate a divorce.
Current: Either partner may initiate a divorce.
Proposed: Either partner may initiate a divorce.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government policy toward marriage.
Old value:: The government only recognises civil marriages between a man and a woman.
Current: The government only recognises civil marriages between a man and a woman.
Proposed: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:15:25, May 27, 2010 CET | From | 姬恩黨 (Jien Faction) 🌄 | To | Debating the Marriage and Divorce Act of 2944 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, We agree with Articles One and Two. Article Three is completely unnecessary. If homosexuals cannot produce a child together that will not be a valuable member of the state, then they should not be allowed to marry. Tradition states that they are not to marry anyways. We yield. |
| Date | 19:24:13, May 28, 2010 CET | From | Socialist Party of Indrala (社會黨 ) | To | Debating the Marriage and Divorce Act of 2944 |
| Message | The Diguodang's narrow-minded conservative world view is rearing it's ugly head again.. The ability to produce children is really your idea of what makes a productive citizen? So then why do you let people who are sterile or women who can't have children get married? I think there's deeper reasons behind your party's opposition to this bill, and your letting one little article that grants more civil rights to gays get in the way of your support??? I think you should really rethink yourself if you really want people here to actually believe that your opposition to this bill is based on the "value of society" argument. Please try again. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 60 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 40 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When forming a cabinet, try to include as few parties as possible, while still obtaining a majority of the seats. |
| Random quote: "From my point of view, the killing of another, except in defense of human life, is archistic, authoritarian, and therefore, no anarchist can commit such deeds. It is the very opposite of what anarchism stands for." - Jo Labadie |