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: Sanctity of Marriage Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Koalisjon for frigjøring
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: August 3493
Description[?]:
| Sanctity of Marriage is under attack by conservative PC maniacs. Sanctity of Marriage has to be protected from discrimanition and segregation. |
Proposals
Article 1
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: 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 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.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:30:59, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Grand National Party | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker, our support for article one goes without saying, but we should end the tug-on-war over governmental definition of marriage and let individuals, private foundations and churches regulate it themselves. Constance Woodhall MP Member for Magadonia RFR Chairwoman |
| Date | 12:47:00, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Koalisjon for frigjøring | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker President Manon raised an important issue about second article, it would lead forced marriages, government needs to control the consent clause on marriage.Maybe some fringe church would allow forced marriages, we can't know that. I hope Ms.Woodhall reconsider her position. Patrick Maddocks MP Leader of MPD MPD Caucus Chair |
| Date | 13:00:45, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Excuse me, but what kind of logic is that? Forced marriages aren't recognized now, and they won't be recognized if marriage privatization is implemented either, since NO marriages will be recognized. We are, quite obviously, against this bill. Rheodoc Aethebryn MP WD Spokesperson on Human Rights |
| Date | 13:03:55, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Koalisjon for frigjøring | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker, We already knew, WD's aim is contaminate marriage with discrimination and segregation. So they obstinate approach is expected. Patrick Maddocks MP Leader of MPD MPD Caucus Chair |
| Date | 13:10:35, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker, Mr. Maddocks has no arguments for his views, just insults. Rheodoc Aethebryn MP WD Spokesperson on Human Rights |
| Date | 13:13:48, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Koalisjon for frigjøring | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker I have many, arguments, like why we should exclude gays from marriage, definition of marriage is this: a legally accepted relationship between two people in which they live together, or the official ceremony that results in this. I can't hear any argument from conservatives other than my book says it. Breaking News: WE DON'T RULE THIS COUNTRY WITH ANY RELIGIONS RULES. Patrick Maddocks MP Leader of MPD MPD Caucus Chair |
| Date | 13:20:36, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker, That's false and you know it. You need no religious arguments to argue against gay marriage. It's as simple as this: the only union that can produce new citizens, and is thus the least, most core unit of society, is one man and one woman, and this union needs a term of it's own. We did propose to implement the reforms suggested by the RFR to give everyone the freedom to interpret the concept of marriage as they wish themselves. It's you who are the moralists and want to force your beliefs upon people. Rheodoc Aethebryn MP WD Spokesperson on Human Rights |
| Date | 14:05:53, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Centre Democrats | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Not having any policy on marriage what so ever is exactly the same as tolerating forced marriage which is the most insane thing I have heard so far in this election period. If the RFR is a libertarian party they will of course support this bill, the WD's bill will only lead to less freedom. President Lucas Manon (R) Party Leader of Retsforbundet |
| Date | 14:11:11, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, No it isn't. Forcing people to participate in any type of ceremony is illegal. The government doesn't have to "recognize" different types of marriages to make clear that any such action is illegal. Rheodoc Aethebryn MP WD Spokesperson on Human Rights |
| Date | 14:16:21, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Centre Democrats | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Rheodoc Aethebryn is so terribly wrong on this matter. This bill will allow forced marriages since it doesn't consist of the word "consenting". President Lucas Manon (R) Party Leader of Retsforbundet |
| Date | 14:23:04, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, No, it won't. There won't be any marriage laws whatsoever if our bill passes, but forcing people to participate in ceremonies they don't want to participate in is still illegal. Rheodoc Aethebryn MP WD Spokesperson on Human Rights |
| Date | 14:35:05, May 30, 2013 CET | From | Grand National Party | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker, in the law allowing political rallies, does it say "consenting" political rallies? No, yet no one would claim that it therefore allows forcing people into participating in political rallies. Nicole DeMoy MP Member for Elbian RFR Justice Spokeswoman |
| Date | 18:07:36, May 31, 2013 CET | From | Dranish Union of Metzists | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker, Even though we oppose civil marriage, we accept it as a lesser evil to what the Satanic MPD proposes. We are glad to see the RFR embrace conservative values even though the leadership of a party by a woman is anathema to us. Women are of equal value but not of equal status. Pastor Simon Drake Chairman of HBC |
| Date | 18:10:15, May 31, 2013 CET | From | Koalisjon for frigjøring | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker We aren't satanic. Most of us are either atheists or UCT. Although I am a deist. Patrick Maddocks MP MPD Caucus Chairman |
| Date | 18:17:49, May 31, 2013 CET | From | Koalisjon for frigjøring | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | OOC: Reddy, I hope you don't think, you can avoid wrath of McClok Mr Speaker Only Satanist in here is High Priest(OOC: Satanist Priest) Drake. He worships hatred, bigotry and vengeance. Those are satanic beliefs. You disgust me, you old cu.t. If you look for tolerence, goodness and fairness than you should look for MPD or Retsforbundet. Anne McClok MP MPD Cultural deputy-spokeswoman |
| Date | 18:39:00, May 31, 2013 CET | From | Dranish Union of Metzists | To | Debating the Sanctity of Marriage Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker, Obviously any one who supports the entrance of women in Parliament can see by the speech of this harridan why the HBC position is better. I would say Satan would favour the parties that fight against the spirit of Hosianism and traditionalist man led family life. Pastor Simon Drake Chairman of HBC |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 153 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 246 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Moderation reserves the discretion to declare RP laws invalid if the players supporting them are doing so in an excessively confrontational way. |
| Random quote: "No one today can afford to be innocent, or indulge himself in ignorance of contemporary governments, politics and social orders. The national polities of the modern world maintain their existence by deliberately fostered craving and fear: monstrous protection rackets. The 'free world' has become economically dependent on a fantastic system of stimulation of greed which cannot be fulfilled, sexual desire which cannot be satiated and hatred which has no outlet except against oneself, the persons one is supposed to love, or the revolutionary aspirations of pitiful, poverty-stricken marginal societies like Cuba or Vietnam. The conditions of the Cold War have turned all modern societies - communist included - into vicious distorters of man's true potential." - Gary Snyder |