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: Increase Adoption Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Libertarian 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: June 2161
Description[?]:
| An act to enable quicker, less regulated adoption. To allow those who have no parents to be put with those couples who are urgently seeking children and have no other means to achieve this. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning adoption.
Old value:: Adoption is strictly regulated by the government. Only by passing several tests and by following an intensive program applicants can adopt children.
Current: Adoption is regulated by the government. Applicants can adopt after a routine check-up.
Proposed: Adoption is not regulated.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:50:04, December 23, 2005 CET | From |  Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Increase Adoption Act |
| Message | This will enable us to meet two demands, we have many families who are desperate to adopt as they cannot have children by any other means, we also have a large amount of children needing adoption. This bill will meet both requirements. For those fearing abuse of those adopted we already have plenty of laws to prevent and / or prosecute should such things happen or even be seen as a probability. |
| Date | 05:29:19, December 24, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Increase Adoption Act |
| Message | But the test ensure that these things are very unlikly. I agree something needs to be done...but sacerficing the security of the Chilidern is not the way to do so. If couples are truly intent on gettig a child from the Adoption Care Centers they dont mind taking a few tests and finding out that they are good parents and getting a kid, in fact it should make them happy to know that there own govenment knows that they are great parents. For the safty of the kids and the peace of mind of the people that give up there kids...these tests are the least we can do. |
| Date | 18:27:03, December 24, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Increase Adoption Act |
| Message | The results of which are thousand of kids in foster homes and thousands of parents looking for children. Both of whom are unhappy with the situation. |
| Date | 20:10:36, December 24, 2005 CET | From | Democratic-Republican Party | To | Debating the Increase Adoption Act |
| Message | Some radical elements of the D-R Party are actually in favor of requiring a license to have children. The vast majority still believe that the state is better trusted than untested individuals. We are sorry that we must cause problems for the majority of the adopters and adoptees to prevent pedophiles and such from getting ahold of these children. |
| Date | 21:57:14, December 24, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Increase Adoption Act |
| Message | Well that is easy. When we catch paedophiles we fasten them to the top of a 30foot high sharpened greased stake with the sharp end very slightly (wouldn't want to cause them pain.....................yet), inserted into a pelvic orifice. Eventually gravity will work it's wonders. After a few such............................er....................demonstrations, we feel sure that Paedophilia will not be a major re-ocurring offence. |
| Date | 02:01:33, December 25, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Increase Adoption Act |
| Message | How dare you speak of such torture and yet you dont want a Death Penealty or the POW Treatment deal to pass...we see this as hypocritical and totaly uncalled for. |
| Date | 21:23:14, December 25, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Increase Adoption Act |
| Message | That last was meant tongue in cheek! We would never consider such ..................................................... at least not without 100% certainty of the persons guilt. There has to be a certain boundary beyond which normal rules do not apply, perhaps this is ours? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 83 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 172 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 38 |
| Random fact: Real-life organisations should not be referenced in Particracy, unless they are simple and generic (eg. "National Organisation for Women" is allowed). |
| Random quote: "The United States is in no sense founded upon the Christian doctrine." - George Washington |