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: PROTECT the WOMEN Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Capitalist Working Families
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: July 3535
Description[?]:
| This is bill is simple and straight-forward: it allows the Rutanian military to bar women from serving in COMBAT positions in the unfortunate case of a war. Of course, this bill does not in ANYWAY discriminate against women from serving HONORABLY in the Armed Forces of Rutania OR to get EQUAL PAY if they do the SAME job that their male counterparts do in the military. Why??? Is this bill sexist?! Of course not. However, in the unfortunate event of war, society should seek and PRESERVE the WOMEN b/c they are the ONLY ones of our species who can get pregnant and bear children thus enable the country to RE-populate itself after it has lost millions of citizens to an act of war or terrorism. Men are and have always been EXPENDABLE (meaning just one man with 300 million sperm cells can impregnate thousands of women in one shot if society needs RE-populating in the event of a war) in which a woman can ONLY get pregnant ONE time per month by ONE "lucky" man (given that she on AVERAGE produces ONLY 1 egg cell per month). All in all, this bill is common-sense and has NOTHING to do with politically polarizing issue of "abortion" of which the CWFP now SUPPORT a Woman's RIGHT to CHOOSE to have one if she so DESIRES. The C-WFP yields the balance of its time. NOTE: This bill has been ENDORSED by the Rutanian Women's Independent Forum & Concerned Women for Rutania organization(s). |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Women in the military.
Old value:: Women serve alongside men.
Current: Women serve alongside men.
Proposed: Women can only serve in non-battle positions.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:34:04, August 23, 2013 CET | From | Democratic Union | To | Debating the PROTECT the WOMEN Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Even after your speech, I still think this bill is sexist. --- Butt Camel, DU Defence manager |
| Date | 15:23:42, August 23, 2013 CET | From | National Purity Union | To | Debating the PROTECT the WOMEN Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Despite the poor arguments made by the CWFP, we still disagree with Mr. Butt Camel and vote in favor of this bill. -Ron Ragamuffin, Defence Minister |
| Date | 19:17:29, August 23, 2013 CET | From | Capitalist Working Families | To | Debating the PROTECT the WOMEN Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, To the claims of "sexism" by the DU Defence Manager: (1) HOW is this bill "sexist???" We are NOT advocating the SEXIST position that has been often invoked my "men" that "Women CANNOT fight!!!" On the contrary, women can do as MUCH EXERCISE and shoot guns as ANY man can (and perhaps even BETTER). However, that is NOT the point. The POINT is that women are BIOLOGICALLY unfit to fight. It is FUNDAMENTALLY different. A WOMAN's anatomy is RADICALLY different than a man in the sense that a WOMAN (assuming that she WANTS to give birth to a child, although she has the LEGAL right to abort IF she chooses) controls the the majority of the REPRODUCTIVE PROCESS. (1) Yes, both males and females are required in the *Reproduction* PROCESS, but according to Biology 101 and human experience, I have NEVER heard or seen a male "bear" any child or get pregnant. (2) Ask your doctor to confirm our biology: the average man produces 300 million sperm cells per day while the average woman produces only ONE egg cell per MONTH....and then once the woman is pregnant she *cannot* ovulate again until 9 months (nearly a year). (3) In the event of our population being radically decreased from an act of war or terrorism, if there is 1 man to every 5 women ratio, that 1 man simply impregnate all 5 women in one shot! However, if women are DYING on the battlefield and the ratio is reversed to 1 woman per 5 men, according to physics and biology (ask your doctor), then that means ONLY one of those men are going to impregnate that woman. Therefore, it would be harder as a nation to RE-populate. (4) In conclusion, if humans EVOLVED differently and MEN were the ones that got PREGNANT with ONE egg cell per month, we logically would support MEN being banned from COMBAT-related positions in the military. Unfortunately, we as a human population did NOT evolve that way. Nonetheless, the ONLY thing that the CWFP is guilty of is being GENTLEMEN to the LADIES!!!! ;) The C-WFP yields the balance of our time. |
| Date | 20:24:36, August 23, 2013 CET | From | Sunbeam Squad | To | Debating the PROTECT the WOMEN Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker First of all, most women are not going to join the armed forces; therefore it is unlikely that allowing women to join the armed forces would result in a reproductive crisis, as the demonstrably science illiterate CWFP seem to "think". Second and most importantly, the government has no business telling women how to value their lives. Women can make that judgment for themselves. Women can choose *not* to reproduce, and it would be perfectly all right if they did. The government has no right no assume that the main responsibility of women is reproduction; and the government has no right to judge women solely by reproductive qualifications, just as the government does not judge men by how good of a labourer they are. M. Ridgeway-Bates |
| Date | 20:50:25, August 23, 2013 CET | From | Democratic Union | To | Debating the PROTECT the WOMEN Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, It's funny the perception of life made by the CWFP. According to them, life is reproduction, reproduction and reproduction, and reproduction is the only goal in the lifes of every single human being in Terra. So let me tell you, if the goal of a woman is to fight for its country and defend it from foreign invasors, then it's so legit than if her goal was to have a lot of children. --- Erik B. Culster, DU Parliamentary Speaker |
| Date | 16:32:35, August 24, 2013 CET | From | Capitalist Working Families | To | Debating the PROTECT the WOMEN Act |
| Message | <http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=390450> Mr. Speaker, May you PLEASE inform Mr. Morris Ridgeway-Bates of the SS Party to ACTUALLY criticize our Party's SO-CALLED "illiterate science"??? We actually STUDY science, but if there is ANOTHER party that respectfully DISAGREES, they must actually lodge a FORMAL criticism of that "science" WITH science. If they do NOT but just "insist" on "name-calling" like a "5 year old child," to be honest they do not even DESERVE to be President of Rutania. Then again, SCIENTISTS do not select the President, but the mostly "uneducated citizentry" does. ;) ----The CWFP Spokesman P.S.: We actually AGREE with Mr. Ridgeway-Bates that it may not lead to a reproductive crisis IF the majority of woman don't enlist in the Armed Forces of Rutania. However, we were making that argument in GENERAL in the CONDITION that at least 50% of the military were women. Thanks again. :) |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 194 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 361 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow role-play that seems to belong to the world of fantasy, science fiction and futuristic speculation. |
| Random quote: "A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic." - Josef Stalin |