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: Senate Resolution 231: Family Retainment & Reinvestment Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Federal Independent 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: September 3075
Description[?]:
SR 231: FRRA |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government position in respect to crossdressing policy.
Old value:: The government has no policy concerning crossdressing.
Current: Crossdressing is prohibited by the state.
Proposed: Crossdressing is prohibited by the state.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The legality of divorces (if marriages are recognised).
Old value:: Divorces are legal, be it mutual consent, grounded cause or if one partner wants it.
Current: Divorces are only legal with grounded cause (such as adultery, or violence).
Proposed: Divorces are only legal with grounded cause (such as adultery, or violence).
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning parental qualifications.
Old value:: The government does not hold qualifications for new parents.
Current: The government does not hold qualifications for new parents.
Proposed: The government requires a test for would-be parents, if parents circumvent the test the government takes custody.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on sexual relations.
Old value:: Sexual relations of all types are legal for consenting adults.
Current: Heterosexual relationships only are legal for consenting adults.
Proposed: Homosexual relations are illegal, but are not prosecuted.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 05:22:34, February 11, 2011 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Senate Resolution 231: Family Retainment & Reinvestment Act |
Message | *from the floor of the Senate* We are still perplexed by the FIP's dramatic change to authoritarian views. However, much of this bill is not a dealbreaker for us, save for Article 4. Article 4 is the one that most clearly and concisely targets a specific group for discrimination. As a Solentian and as a gay man, I am disturbed deeply by Article 4. This bill would see our support if Article 4 were dropped. I yield back. Brandon Helmkamp Social Democratic Vice Chancellor |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||||
yes | Total Seats: 35 | ||||||
no |
Total Seats: 390 | ||||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Particracy does not allow real-life brand names (eg. Coca Cola, McDonalds, Microsoft). However, in the case of military equipment brand names it is permitted to use simple number-letter combinations (eg. T-90 and F-22) borrowed from real life, and also simple generic names, like those of animals (eg. Leopard and Jaguar). |
Random quote: "I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical." - Thomas Jefferson |