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: OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution
Details
Submitted by[?]: Edelweiss Party
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: November 2171
Description[?]:
| Honorable Colleagues, The OMP seeks to restore the decency inside the Nation's Military Force. In order to serve and protect the Likaton citizens as effective and efficient as possible we cannot tolerate any 'mutual distractions' - in the broad view in the meaning of that term. The OP is not against homosexuality but it beliefs that those are private matters/recreational, which have no place in a military system. Regards. Mattheus Drova OMP - Oberhaupt |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Military stance on homosexuality.
Old value:: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Current: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Proposed: Open homosexuality is not tolerated in the military. The military has a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:42:10, January 13, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | This is amuch better, much more libera policy. Why should the army know a recruits sexuality? Much better left up to the individual. |
| Date | 17:56:55, January 13, 2006 CET | From | Edelweiss Party | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | We want to thank the CP for its support. |
| Date | 20:18:16, January 13, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | The AAS opposes. This policy must lead directly to a point where it again becomes awkward to have sexuality discovered. The current military suffers none of the espionage threats we encountered so long ago... where a soldier's 'preference' might be used as a tool, to barter for information, or sabotage. The completely open approach to sexuality has lessened such incidences, as well as drastically reducing the threat that a perfectly good soldier can be discharged JUST because another soldier dislikes his orientation. |
| Date | 21:13:17, January 13, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | But it has led to the large amount of bullying, especially of self confessed homosexual soldiers within the armed forces, that has risen to levels unheard of prior to the creation of the current law. |
| Date | 21:32:31, January 13, 2006 CET | From | Edelweiss Party | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | We wish to emphasize that the current stance our party has taken in this resolution is the search for a golden mean. If this regulation appears to be a problem for strategic reasons (espionage, sabotage, ...) we migth want to abolish with homosexuality in the military. |
| Date | 04:38:26, January 14, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | The AAS feels it necessary to point out to the OMP, that you cannot 'abolish' homosexuality. Figures show that at least 10% of all Likatonian citizens consider themselves EXCLUSIVELY homosexual... with the statistics assumed to be MUCH higher for those of less concrete 'opinions'. You cannot 'abolish' homosexuality... or ANY sexuality. All you can do, is drive it into hiding. |
| Date | 07:19:50, January 14, 2006 CET | From | JLP Liberation Militia | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | JLP will support. Sexuality is not a military matter. Let's not make it one. |
| Date | 10:34:35, January 14, 2006 CET | From | Right Wing Liberals Party | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | Quite siple yes. |
| Date | 11:53:05, January 14, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | Thos figures seem far too high AAS, especially given that our population is still growing, which would suggest that homosexuality is closer to 4-6% |
| Date | 15:44:13, January 14, 2006 CET | From | Edelweiss Party | To | Debating the OMP Act of 2170 - Military Policy Resolution |
| Message | Based on what ground does one would like to imply that 'homosexuality' is an result of nature, which amount of it grows together with the overall population? We rather believe that it has become some sort of 'trend' that a person 'names' himself a 'homosexual'. True or not, those matters need to be maintained as 'private affairs' - not has one single individual the right to enforce that onto the Nation and claim for rights - an single individuals rights or that of a minority group are subordinated to the interests of the Nation. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 230 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 210 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 60 |
| 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: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." - Universal Declaration of Human Rights |