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: Human Rights Protection Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: People's Party - Republican Democrats
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: April 3046
Description[?]:
.This bill is designed to overturn some of the more blatantly authoritorian policies of the right-wing government. It may probably not go far enough for some on some points, and it will go too far on many points for the parties which proposed those authoritarian laws and brought them into effect, but it is only meant to be a step towards recreating and free and democratic Aldegar. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning who can proceed with adoption; in case adoption is legal.
Old value:: Only heterosexual couples and singles may adopt children.
Current: Everyone may adopt children.
Proposed: Everyone may adopt children.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy with respect to adultery.
Old value:: Adultery is a capital offence.
Current: There is no explicit government policy on adultery.
Proposed: Adultery is legal.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning granting citizenship.
Old value:: Citizenship is gained by passing a qualifying exam.
Current: Citizenship is granted to all nationals.
Proposed: Citizenship is granted to all nationals.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Old value:: The death penalty is not applied, except for terrorism, treason and crimes against mankind.
Current: The death penalty is illegal and is never to be applied.
Proposed: The death penalty is illegal and is never to be applied.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The legality of divorces (if marriages are recognised).
Old value:: Divorces are only legal with grounded cause (such as adultery, or violence).
Current: Only divorces that comply with religious doctrine are legal.
Proposed: Divorces are legal, be it mutual consent, grounded cause or if one partner wants it.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change Military stance on homosexuality.
Old value:: Open homosexuality is not tolerated in the military. The military has a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Current: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Proposed: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Article 7
Proposal[?] to change Government recognition of interracial marriages (if marriages are recognised).
Old value:: Any form of unofficial interracial marriage or civil union is banned.
Current: Mixed race marriages follow the same regulation as other marriages.
Proposed: Mixed race marriages follow the same regulation as other marriages.
Article 8
Proposal[?] to change Government policy toward marriage.
Old value:: The government only recognises civil marriages between a man and a woman.
Current: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Proposed: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Article 9
Proposal[?] to change The nation's policy on the separation of the police and the military.
Old value:: The military acts as a de-facto police force, with powers of arrest.
Current: A civilian police force is in place and the military may be called in to help in serious emergencies.
Proposed: A civilian police force is in place and the military is not allowed to play any part in it.
Article 10
Proposal[?] to change The weapons used by police forces.
Old value:: Police officers carry military-grade equipment.
Current: Police officers may only carry standard firearms apart from specially trained firearms units.
Proposed: Police officers may only carry standard firearms apart from specially trained firearms units.
Article 11
Proposal[?] to change The use of torture for obtaining information.
Old value:: Suspects can only be tortured under grave emergencies where the information is vital.
Current: Torture is never allowed.
Proposed: Torture is never allowed.
Article 12
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy with respect to polygamy.
Old value:: The government does not recognise polygamous relationships and prosecute those who pursue a polygamous lifestyle.
Current: The government does not recognise polygamous relationships.
Proposed: The government does not recognise polygamous relationships.
Article 13
Proposal[?] to change Displays of public affection and obscenity laws.
Old value:: All sexually implicit actions are illegal in public.
Current: There are no laws regarding obscene public acts.
Proposed: Sexual intercourse is illegal in public.
Article 14
Proposal[?] to change Racial and religious registration of nationals.
Old value:: All nationals are required to register their race and religion.
Current: The government does not require nationals to register their race or religion.
Proposed: The government does not require nationals to register their race or religion.
Article 15
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on sexual relations.
Old value:: Heterosexual relationships only are legal for consenting adults.
Current: Sexual relations of all types are legal for consenting adults.
Proposed: Sexual relations of all types are legal for consenting adults.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 11:41:11, December 12, 2010 CET | From | Aldegar National Monarchic Front | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | This bill, as formuled, contains too many and too different matters to be seriously discussed and voted. We could discuss Articles 9, 14 and 15. Otherways we will not support this bill. |
Date | 15:01:12, December 12, 2010 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | As this bill is designed to overturn a range of the authoritarian policies that have been enacted by the parties in the current coalition government, we suppose there isn't really much to discuss with the BBNA, the NH, or that other party. |
Date | 15:18:33, December 12, 2010 CET | From | rEvolution | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | The PP does not even dare to utter our name. Good. Gooood. *evil laughter* |
Date | 16:18:42, December 12, 2010 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | OOC: It's bad enough I have to swallow my disgust every time I have to look at your name, why should I give it further recognition by using it (even without the additional characters)? |
Date | 00:41:25, December 13, 2010 CET | From | Nemangha Humananghô | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | Human rights? Preposterous! |
Date | 09:59:04, December 13, 2010 CET | From | Aldegar National Monarchic Front | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | PP is right: this authoritarian and extremistic drift is going too far. |
Date | 15:59:47, December 13, 2010 CET | From | Aldegar Post-Left | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | "this authoritarian and extremistic drift is going too far." That seems a bit odd coming from "Big Brother's National Alliance." Perhaps the name is a bit misleading? |
Date | 08:50:30, December 14, 2010 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | The BBNA's name and their self-discription are indeed somewhat at odds. |
Date | 09:28:33, December 14, 2010 CET | From | Aldegar National Monarchic Front | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | We do not accept any lesson coming from PP and APL! We are not extremistic or authoritarian but - yes - we are a conservative and democratic force. And we're proud of it. Even the parties of the coalition where we are accuse us to be too "moderate". We suggest you both to look beyond the party's name: which really count are ideas and actions taken, not names. |
Date | 11:09:37, December 14, 2010 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | We were not trying to give any lessons to the BBNA. It is simply a plain fact that their name, the Big Brother's National Alliance does conjure up a certain authoritarian image which IS at odds with their self-description as a democratic and moderate party. However, we agree that what really counts are a party's actual policies, not their name or their self-description. |
Date | 12:48:04, December 14, 2010 CET | From | Aldegar National Monarchic Front | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | ooc: ok...you are right and I've to admit the name I choose is not totally representative of the political platform of my party. :D |
Date | 23:11:53, December 14, 2010 CET | From | Nemangha Humananghô | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | If anything, the government should have no formal policy on adultery. "Legalizing" it simply encourages it, and having no formal policy entails the same de facto freedom the PP desires. |
Date | 14:52:24, December 15, 2010 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the Human Rights Protection Bill |
Message | In theory, we agree with the NH that the absence of a law prohibting adultery would make it perfectly legal. However, given that the right-wing coalition made it a capital offence, we felt that further clarification was needed to assure the people that they would not be prosecuted for something that is essentially a private matter. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||
yes | Total Seats: 104 | |||
no | Total Seats: 95 | |||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: In your Message Centre there is a really useful feature which allows you to subscribe to all of the bill debates in your nation. If you use that, then the "Watched Discussions" section will show you every time a new message has been posted on a bill. You can also subscribe to other pages you want to follow, such as your nation message-board, party organisations or bills outside your nation which you are interested in. |
Random quote: "An independent is someone who wants to take the politics out of politics." - Adlai Stevenson |