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: National Salvation Bill (iv)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Likaton Fascist Front
Status[?]: passed
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 2171
Description[?]:
The PSS proposes the following: We, the PSS stand for preservation of Life. We also beleive that where there is life, there is hope. As such, we beleive that mortals should not be making the decision of who lives and who dies (we echo many of the comments we made during the abortion debate). |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The right to euthanasia.
Old value:: Euthanasia is allowed with consent from the patient and the treating doctor.
Current: Euthanasia is allowed with consent from the patient and the treating doctor.
Proposed: Euthanasia is illegal and considered murder.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 15:23:59, January 11, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | The AAS absolutely opposes. |
Date | 15:49:44, January 11, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | RLP opposes. The difference between this and the abortion debates is that the entity being killed has to give consent before the act can occur. |
Date | 22:57:39, January 11, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | Yes, murder is murder, whether there is consent or not. |
Date | 00:30:34, January 12, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | Response to CP: What about suicide? |
Date | 21:03:05, January 12, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | What do you mean? It would be very hard to police acts of suicide, unless the idiot fails, as seems to happen in a surprisingly high proportion of suicide attempts. However euthenasia can be policed, and certainly shouldn't be legal, let alone encouraged. |
Date | 01:29:30, January 13, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | But, is not euthenasia just 'assisted suicide'? |
Date | 16:27:16, January 13, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | I don't see what you are getting at. Euthenasia can be policed, because if a docter "assists" in suicide then he can be punished for it, if an individual attempts suicide and is successful how would you punish them? |
Date | 16:52:55, January 13, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | So - what you are saying is, you want to crack down on everything you can IMPRISON or EXECUTE someone for... but are willing to just let the same 'crimes' slide, if you can't catch anyone? |
Date | 21:06:49, January 13, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | What? Explain to me how you police suicide? How does the police go about putting a successful suicidee on trial? How do you go about catching a successful suicidee? Are the AAS really suggesting which should put corpses up for trial? |
Date | 04:25:20, January 14, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | That is, indeed, pretty much the point the AAS is making. The CP is going to prosecute the 'assistant' in an 'assissted suicide'... because they CAN. They see that conventional suicides leave nobody to arrest, so they are obviously forced to just 'suck it up' on conventional suicides. The AAS believes that every citizen should have the right to die, if they so choose. It is inhuman to keep somebody alive who is in great pain, just because you are too squeamish to let them end it. |
Date | 11:46:29, January 14, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | Wow, that was really worth arguing over. We still think suicide should be illegal, whether assissted or not, but we still do not see how you can punish a successful suicidee. Right to die is not something the government should encourage, we do not see where squeamishness comes into, as the AAS know the, CP is very pro-military, so I think your second point is meaningless. |
Date | 21:07:41, January 14, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | The AAS believes that the CP is, perhaps, gifted with an iron constitution, when it comes to deaths overseas... but a little more meek, when it comes to a death-toll on Likatonian soil. |
Date | 21:47:56, January 14, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Fascist Front | To | Debating the National Salvation Bill (iv) |
Message | PSS will consider placing relatives of successfull suicidees on trial. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||||
yes |
Total Seats: 282 | ||||||
no | Total Seats: 218 | ||||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
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: "Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others." - Ambrose Bierce |