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: Civil liberties bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Patterson House
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: November 3299
Description[?]:
| N |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning who can proceed with adoption; in case adoption is legal.
Old value:: Everyone may adopt children.
Current: Everyone may adopt children.
Proposed: Only heterosexual couples may adopt children.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The legality of interracial sex.
Old value:: Interracial sex is legal.
Current: Interracial sex is legal.
Proposed: Interracial sex is completely illegal.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy with respect to polygamy.
Old value:: Polygamous marriages are accorded equal recognition to monogamous marriages.
Current: The government does not recognise polygamous relationships.
Proposed: The government does not recognise polygamous relationships and prosecute those who pursue a polygamous lifestyle.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:32:21, May 03, 2012 CET | From | Williams Family | To | Debating the Civil liberties bill |
| Message | This is a ridiculous suppression of human rights - especially article 2! Strongly opposed! |
| Date | 03:34:01, May 03, 2012 CET | From |  Beluz Democratic Karavist Party | To | Debating the Civil liberties bill |
| Message | They did this for visibility. They did it to show what they're against instead of what they're for. |
| Date | 05:35:36, May 06, 2012 CET | From | House of Amistad | To | Debating the Civil liberties bill |
| Message | Article 3 is interesting I would like to see more details on blended or communal families guidelines which is not true (standard) polygamy. Articles 1 & 2 are extreme and IMO a violation of basic civil liberties seemingly based on personal preference and not the general welfare. I oppose both issues. |
| Date | 05:41:02, May 06, 2012 CET | From | Beluz Democratic Karavist Party | To | Debating the Civil liberties bill |
| Message | They did this for visibility. They did it to show what they're against instead of what they're for. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 88 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 11 |
| Random fact: Real life-life nationalities, cultures or ethnicities should not be referenced in Particracy (eg. "German"). |
| Random quote: "An "acceptable" level of unemployment means that the government economist to whom it is acceptable still has a job." - Author Unknown |