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: Women Military Segregation Act- 3749
Details
Submitted by[?]: People of Freedom (P.F)
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 3751
Description[?]:
| Proposal. Our party believes women should be separated from men in the military. As to form units of special forces with ladies as well as battalion sized unit s ready for combat. Also to avoid horrific cases of rape that our legislation lacks in dealing with properly. Raven Valentinn JDP Deputy Leader |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Women in the military.
Old value:: Women serve alongside men.
Current: Women serve alongside men.
Proposed: Women serve in segregated units.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:23:59, October 28, 2014 CET | From | Democratic Communist Party | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Even if we segregate women from the men, we send these women units off to war, Is that going to make much more of a difference, Will there really be a drop in cases of rape. If anything things should stay how they are. That's what we believe. |
| Date | 14:47:09, October 28, 2014 CET | From |  Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, This presents a very gendered view of rape. Same-sex rape exists as well; what will we do about that? -- George Huddleson, Opposition Spokesman on Justice |
| Date | 23:30:08, October 28, 2014 CET | From | Social Libermuns Party | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, We are in agreement with the GNRG. A much more appropriate way of dealing with rape would be to: *create resolutions with policies that help decrease incidence *increase the severity of punishment *increase the accessibility that one has to report rape As for the actual article, segregation will do more harm than good. It creates an us vs. them mentality, because we will then treat the women differently. That's not a good thing when the cohesiveness of our armies is paramount. The DCP is correct in stating that we are sending these soldiers to war, and they are not to be coddled. ~ Rowan Argall FISH Head |
| Date | 00:07:29, October 29, 2014 CET | From | Conservative Monarchist Alliance | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Women do not belong on the front line in war at all. Placing them there is wrong and unnatural. It goes completely against the most basic instinct in man, which is to defend women and children from assault. We would be prepared to support this legislation as an improvement upon the status quo, however. Sensible and conscientious generals would take care to keep women's units away from the fighting as much as practically possible. Sergio Arechavaleta Foreign Affairs spokesman |
| Date | 00:28:01, October 29, 2014 CET | From | Social Libermuns Party | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, I am rapidly tiring of defending this nation from the insanity of members in this Presidium. Mr. Arechavaleta has obviously drunk too much Hosian Banana Juice. ~ Rowan Argall FISH Head |
| Date | 14:56:43, October 29, 2014 CET | From | Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, If we banned Hosians from the country, they wouldn't be in the Presidium saying madness like that. Lodamese Nationalism promotes gender equality, and that is the stance of my party. -- Gordon Fertig, Chairman of the GNRG, Opposition Leader |
| Date | 15:58:29, October 29, 2014 CET | From | Liber Populi | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr Speaker, To this Bill we are of the opinion it is along the right lines, however if it were simply to remove women from front line infantry duties we would completely agree. Although we stand for equal opportunities, we do have good reasons for our opinions regarding this issue. That said, and having mentioned Equal opportunities, we believe that equal opportunities is a very important issue here. How so? Well as follows: Perhaps we could improve all things within our Armed Forces if we could possibly pass an equal opportunities law that requires at least 51% of all Armed Forces be made up from the (Adult Age) children of people in positions of power, influence , parents that are part of the Presidium, that own large media groups or part of the richest most influential people in our nation. We think it unfair on these families that they are under represented in our great Military. We also, more importantly, believe then that any issues - be it rape or anything else - that is a negative effect on our Armed Forces would be dealt with very rapidly. Joshua Morgan Leader Caducus Orientis |
| Date | 17:45:04, October 29, 2014 CET | From | Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, My party leader and I disagree with Joshua Morgan. We don't see what good reasons exist for removing women from the front lines. We believe in gender equality. Is Joshua Morgan suggesting that women are somehow less fit for being on the front line? Are women weaker, or less competent? A woman should decide whether she can join the military or not. She should have the front line in mind when she's joining the military. This segregation is ridiculous. I don't want to hear about rape in this discussion, because this proposal does not prevent rape. Are we implying that heterosexual men cannot control themselves and that we have to keep the women segregated to prevent rape? Are we also implying that rape is only done to women by men? What about men who rape men, women who rape men, or women who rape women? Using rape to justify this proposal is ridiculous. -- George Huddleson, Opposition Spokesman on Justice |
| Date | 18:23:44, October 29, 2014 CET | From | Liber Populi | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, In response to George Huddleson. Let me first say that I would speak up for gender equality of anyone - if the role in question were EQUALLY suited to either gender. Here, however, it is more complex than that. What I am in fact suggesting is that - while it is not vital to take into account - it is only honest to take into account that the males and females of our species have evolved differently with different attributes and a different chemical make up i.e; males produce larger amounts of testosterone (known to be the crucial factor in aggression and other responses that aid one to fight and survive in conflict). Also all humans have chemical reactions related to sexual attraction, an unnecessary distraction on the battlefield and a possible reason to back this Bill. Now it may offend and not sound "politically correct" , it is -however- scientifically correct. I am not suggesting superiority of one gender over the other but simply stating the fact that there exist differences in biology and so also in the areas where either gender is likely perform better. That is not to say there are not roles within the Armed Forces suited to women, just to say that front line infantry combat is not one of them. Joshua Morgan Leader Caducus Orientis |
| Date | 18:29:57, October 29, 2014 CET | From | Liber Populi | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr Speaker, May I add that it is not simply a matter of my preference I speak for, but hopefully to preserve more lives during the bloodshed that is the idiocy called war ! |
| Date | 18:33:29, October 29, 2014 CET | From | Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | And again, Mr. Speaker, Sexual attraction does not only exist between males and females. Sexual attraction exists between males and males, and females and females, as well. The biological differences between males and females are not so concrete that all males are stronger than all females. Many females are stronger than many males, and many females can be more aggressive than many males. Not every male has the same amount of testosterone, and some females have more than many males. To simply write off someone as less able to serve on the front line, simply because that someone is a female, is ridiculous and sexist. Individuals are more complex than the dichotomies drawn by the socially-conservative Members of this Presidium. -- George Huddleson, Opposition Spokesman on Justice |
| Date | 18:53:40, October 29, 2014 CET | From | Liber Populi | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr Speaker, This talk of equality : Is it not coming from a spokesman for a party (GNRG) who also stated that a particular religion , or its followers should not be allowed in the country? The particular spokesman himself calling the members of that same religion a disease. Furthermore we stand for equality - religious, racial, gender or otherwise - just not when it means discriminating against a particular person or persons by expecting them to do equal to someone who has a natural advantage over them. That is backwards equality. Joshua Morgan Leader Caducus Orientis |
| Date | 07:27:02, October 30, 2014 CET | From | Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, We stand for gender equality. Joshua Morgan says he stands for equality including gender equality; that is a lie. We did not say that we stand for religious equality. Hosianism is a foreign disease that does not belong here. -- Gordon Fertig, Chairman of the GNRG, Opposition Leader |
| Date | 09:49:46, October 30, 2014 CET | From | Social Libermuns Party | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, In defense of the GNRG and their religious views, their members put Lodamun before anything else. It is only right for those who follow Nationalism to expect the same from their fellow nationals. Those who practice other religions do not worship Lodamun the way they should when given the privilege of being a citizen. We applaud the GNRG for it's excellent arguments to the actual topic discussion. But to get back to the matter at hand, we would like to go back to the point the Joshua Morgan brought up. "Expecting [someone] to do equal to someone who has a natural advantage over them" is an invalid point. It might makes sense if we were conscripting - to not force people into roles that they are not suited to. However, our military is voluntary. We do not ban or segregate women from the military because it is not necessary to do so. They are adults that can make their own decisions and we should treat them as such. It's also apt to point out that we do not expect all our soldiers to have equal skills and abilities. They all bring skills to the table that are then applied as best as possible to the armed forces as a whole. There are no expectations in that sense. And to judge things purely off of the stand point of physical strength is ludicrous. While heavy-lifting is an important task to fulfill, it is not the be-all and end-all. You know what I do, Mr. Morgan, when something is too heavy for me to lift on my own? I ask for assistance. And as a smart man who has a fair understanding of science and logic, I assume you would to. That is what inevitably will happen when the weight gets too heavy for any one person. You share the load. That's why we don't have single soldiers out on their own, but units. Besides if were talking physical capabilities, then we should bring up endurance not strength. When it comes to the long treks that our soldiers face, women are just as capable. Their endurance capabilities are on par if not greater than males at ultramarathon trail lengths. This is far more important to a soldier than their lifting capabilities. I cannot stand by and watch while you treat women as less than able to hold their own. This is a great injustice. ~ Rowan Argall FISH Head |
| Date | 13:22:05, October 30, 2014 CET | From | Liber Populi | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr Speaker, I just want to make clear that I did not make any suggestion of physical strength - that bias has been brought in from the members that spoke of it. I made mention of the biological difference of chemicals such as testosterone and others that aid an individual in a combat/dangerous. Yes some women have more than some men, however - on the whole - men have more because the very hormone that causes a foetus to become male within the womb is a flood of testosterone. Again this is the chemical that aids in combat, a place where we cannot ask for help during a firefight. I did not say at any point women should not be in the Armed Forces just that one specific area I feel is very inappropriate for them. I feel very strongly about equal rights and have at no point suggested that its just I dont want women in the frontline INFANTRY but that I feel biology makes it a danger for them and that is not my fault, I would be glad to be wrong but I am not. Also at the start of debate I said I do not feel so strongly about this that I would insist upon this, I would happily be advised by an expert in biology and gender differences and if wrong would happily admit so. However, this is the last I shall say on this matter as this Bill - of the Justice and Development Party - does not propose removing women from front line infantry but in fact absolute segregation from men within the Armed Forces. So what this debate has become is all academic really - not at all about the Bill itself. Joshua Morgan Leader Caducus Orientis |
| Date | 14:54:37, October 30, 2014 CET | From | Liber Populi | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | OOC: Forgive the poor punctuation and grammar in that, I didnt proof read it. |
| Date | 15:04:12, October 30, 2014 CET | From | Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Banning all women from the front line, just because most women have less testosterone than most men, is silly. If testosterone is the issue, test each individual for his/her testosterone level. While the proposal says nothing about the front line at the moment, MPs from the CMA and the CO have spoken of the front line. - The MP from the CMA said "Women do not belong on the front line in war at all." - The MP from the CO said that his party "would completely agree" if the proposal was "simply to remove women from front line infantry duties" as opposed to the general proposal, which is merely "along the right lines" of what the CO would want. We maintain the same stance that we have maintained throughout the debate. We do not think that a woman should be prohibited from serving on the front line if she wants to serve on the front line. We also maintain our stance on the bill; we see no reason for gender segregation in the military. -- George Huddleson, Opposition Spokesman on Justice |
| Date | 22:55:36, October 30, 2014 CET | From | Social Libermuns Party | To | Debating the Women Military Segregation Act- 3749 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, This may be an academic discussion, Mr. Morgan, but it is a necessary one, seeing as there are members of the Presidium that do not respect women enough to let them make their own choices. I'm sorry I have singled you out in particular. You've actually been quite receptive to the conversation. I am having this discussion because I would be doing a disservice to my mother, my sister, my wife, and my daughter if I did not address this issue as thoroughly as possible. The most important biological chemical in combat would not be testosterone, but adrenaline. The adrenaline rush is exactly the same for both sexes. Testosterone helps building strength, for it is a steroid. You would not suggest someone go on steroids to be more useful in combat. I'll give you this, Testosterone does play a role in our decision-making. It makes us more likely to take risks. You decide whether that's a good thing or not. I prefer my soldiers to strategically calculate their odds, however. And, if you were in a firefight this is exactly the time to hope your buddies have your back. Hopefully the unit would not be caught too off-guard. They're meant to work as a team. These are the situations soldiers train for. ~ Rowan Argall SLP Leader |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 119 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 285 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 195 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow official national flags of real-life nations or flags which are very prominent and recognisable (eg. the flags of the European Union, the United Nations, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or the Confederate States of America). |
| Random quote: "For every action there is an equal and opposite government program." - Bob Wells |