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: Freedom Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic 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: October 3523
Description[?]:
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Policy of the government concerning the funding of abortions
Old value:: The government only funds abortions for medical emergencies.
Current: The government provides funding for abortions.
Proposed: The government provides funding for abortions.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy with respect to adultery.
Old value:: Adultery is illegal, but not prosecuted.
Current: Adultery is legal.
Proposed: Adultery is legal.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Racial segregation of public amenities (eg. drinking fountains, public toilets)
Old value:: Government owned amenities are not segregated, private organisations are free to choose.
Current: Segregation of any public amenity is banned.
Proposed: Segregation of any public amenity is banned.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding bestiality (performing sexual acts with animals).
Old value:: Bestiality is illegal.
Current: Bestiality is illegal.
Proposed: Bestiality is only legal if it causes no damage to the animals concerned.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The government's position towards the administration of law.
Old value:: There are no courts, the Head of State will determine what's right or wrong.
Current: There are regional courts that have jurisdiction over questions of regional law and national courts that have jurisdiction over questions of national law.
Proposed: There are regional courts, but decisions of regional courts may be appealed to national courts (if the right to appeal exists).
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change Government position in respect to crossdressing policy.
Old value:: The government has no policy concerning crossdressing.
Current: Crossdressing is allowed.
Proposed: Crossdressing is allowed.
Article 7
Proposal[?] to change The government's position towards the use of forensic DNA databases.
Old value:: All citizens' DNA is recorded.
Current: Only DNA from persons convicted of crime is recorded.
Proposed: Only DNA from persons convicted of crime is recorded.
Article 8
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Current: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Proposed: The government may not seize private property.
Article 9
Proposal[?] to change National policy regarding the desecration of the national flag.
Old value:: The national flag may not be desecrated or dishonoured.
Current: The national flag may not be desecrated or dishonoured.
Proposed: There are no regulations regarding the desecration or use of the national flag.
Article 10
Proposal[?] to change Ownership of guns by private individuals.
Old value:: Adult individuals are allowed to own and purchase guns freely.
Current: Adult individuals may own guns under strict license conditions.
Proposed: Adult individuals may not own firearms unless professionally required.
Article 11
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on inheritance
Old value:: There is a regulated inheritance law, private regulation of inheritance is allowed but also regulated.
Current: There is a regulated inheritance law, private regulation of inheritance is allowed but also regulated.
Proposed: There are no regulated inheritance laws, inheritance is only regulated by the will of deceased.
Article 12
Proposal[?] to change The legality of interracial sex.
Old value:: The government has no policy concerning interracial sex.
Current: Interracial sex is legal.
Proposed: Interracial sex is legal.
Article 13
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on public nudity.
Old value:: Public nudity is illegal, but private nudist colonies and beaches are permitted.
Current: Public nudity is illegal, but private nudist colonies and beaches are permitted.
Proposed: There are no laws with regards to public nudity, it is allowed.
Article 14
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy with respect to the production of pornography.
Old value:: The production of pornography is legal, but regulated.
Current: The production of pornography is legal, but regulated.
Proposed: The production of pornography is treated as any other business.
Article 15
Proposal[?] to change The right for a person to prostitute himself or herself.
Old value:: Prostitution is legal but not recognized under government employment regulation policy.
Current: Prostitution is legal and a recognized profession.
Proposed: Prostitution is legal and a recognized profession.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:29:19, July 30, 2013 CET | From |  Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Freedom Act |
| Message | This bill has so many unrelated articles, and I'll address each one. Article 1, especially, is more of a violation of freedom than guarantee of it. While the LNP supports abortions, we understand that not everyone does. The 2nd largest party (the LFP) and the Communist Party (the CPL) both oppose abortion. They together hold 140 seats, representing about 46%-47% of the population. With such a high percentage of the population opposing abortion, we still kept it legal to guarantee the right, but we would never dare to go as far as forcing taxpayers to fund something they don't support. We will fund abortions in medical emergencies, but that's as far as it goes. Abortion is still legal, so if someone wants an abortion for a different reason, they are free to pay for it. Article 2 is ridiculous. No-one is prosecuted for adultery. To make it "legal" implies that the law endorses it. We consider it a breach of marriage contracts, as far as law is concerned. Article 3 limits the freedom of a private business to choose how it offers its services. If consumers are so anti-segregation, they will boycott businesses which pursue segregational policies. Notice that the law doesn't allow public sector buildings to segregate amenities. Article 4 isn't only about "damage" when it comes on to animal rights. How do you know an animal gives consent, when it can't speak? And what if I told you that a Zardic spy got bored and had sex with the chicken that some of us were eating while mingling, before the council session? If you want to "blow" his "flute" - at least do it directly. Don't use the chicken not being harmed as an excuse to allow him to play "music" into it. In regards to Article 5, the current Prince devolves such responsibilities to us, honourable members of the council. We set the law and we know why we set it; are we not good enough judges to collectively exercise our discretion on some issues? Article 6 would imply that the state endorses crossdressing. The current law doesn't make crossdressing illegal; it's not banned and we aren't violating any civil rights. To say, however, that the state endorses crossdressing, is to misrepresent a large percentage of our conservative population, thereby violating their freedom of expression. Article 7 will accomplish nothing. There are a lot of benefits of recording DNA, and we can elaborate on these if you choose to ask. It's as useful in the Health sector as it is in the prevention of crime. In the case of crime prevention, we emphasise the word "prevention" because prevention is better than cure. Why should we wait until after a serial killer kills his 3rd victim before we're able to identify him from the first 2, given that it's his first killing spree? Article 8 has other laws that go along with it to ensure that citizens are given just compensation for whatever land the government takes from them. The Land Management Council, which your party can join if it has seats in the next election, can handle these matters and you can oppose the taking of land in cases where you want to, or even negotiate compensation between the citizens and the state. As Nationalists, we will oppose Article 9. We do not see how Article 10 will help freedom. This bill is badly named. Under that law, as I believe I've said in the council before, a hitman or criminal would have more rights to own a gun than an average citizen. Even if we were to ban all guns, would the criminals care? Only the good citizens would listen, and only the bad ones would still have the guns. Article 11 can lead to great confusion in a case where the deceased person hasn't explicitly stated his/her will. Article 12 implies that the state is needed to give interracial couples the right to have sex. Why do we even need to make a law specifically relating to interracial sex? By simply calling it "interracial sex" - we imply that it's not normal sex, and therefore imply that it's not normal. It would be better if we never specified a policy on it; after all, it's not illegal. No laws speak against interracial sex. We'd just be wasting money and paper to enforce a law that is pointless. There are some things where the state doesn't need to state a policy; the state doesn't need to be in every individual's personal life down to every detail. Sex laws - really? How is this freedom? My response to Article 13 should be obvious; I don't want to see Victor Steele naked. Porn can't be treated like any other business as Article 14 would make it. We believe pornstarts should have a registry, to confirm age, make health insurance more accessible, and to control the spread of STDs if that problem ever hits that industry. In regards to Article 15, we don't oppose prostitution, but we prefer the current law. Recognizing it as a normal profession, however, is something I'm opposed to doing (because of economics, not moral crap). Few prostitutes make a steady income. It's not like a regular job where income is a steady amount per week or month. I don't think prostitutes or artists should pay income taxes, for this reason. It will be hard to tax prostittion. How will we know exactly how much money they make? Will all of them willingly tell us? Will some even admit they're prostitutes? Some can tell us, but still lie about the amount to evade taxes, and we wouldn't know. It's hard to enforce. Like art, I think prostitution should be considered a hobby that money can be made from, but not a full-time job. I would support prostitutes getting whatever benefits unemployed persons get, because they may not make a steady income (except for the ones already employed in bars or strip clubs; those are different, since they're already paid and their income already regulated and recorded by an institution). These are my remarks on this bill, Mr. Chairman. -- Edwin Fertig, Vice President |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 300 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players have a responsibility to differentiate between OOC (out-of-character) and IC (in-character) behaviour, and to make clear when they are communicating in OOC or IC terms. Since Particracy is a role-playing game, IC excesses are generally fine, but OOC attacks are not. However, players must not presume this convention permits them to harass a player with IC remarks that have a clear OOC context. |
| Random quote: "A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise." - Niccolo Machiavelli |