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: Ethical Boundaries Act (October 3947)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Ultranationalists
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 3948
Description[?]:
| We believe that it is our moral duty to be against torture and have every faith in our police force and military personnel to develop and practice interrogative techniques that are less barbaric. We believe that sexual predators are not the only people who pose a risk to our vulnerable children. We believe that a person's privacy is inviolable and there are a variety of other more ethical ways to monitor a suspect. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The use of torture for obtaining information.
Old value:: Suspects can only be tortured under grave emergencies where the information is vital.
Current: Torture is never allowed.
Proposed: Torture is never allowed.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning adoption.
Old value:: Regulation is used to screen out only those with a previous history of child abuse.
Current: Adoption is regulated by the government. Applicants can adopt after a routine check-up.
Proposed: Adoption is regulated by the government. Applicants can adopt after a routine check-up.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The confidentiality of letters and correspondence.
Old value:: The confidentiality of letters is inviolable, but the justice dept. can violate it in extreme situations.
Current: The confidentiality of letters is inviolable, but the justice dept. can violate the confidentiality of letters with grounded cause.
Proposed: The confidentiality of letters is inviolable.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:07:07, December 05, 2015 CET | From |  Federal Heritage Party of Hutori | To | Debating the Ethical Boundaries Act (October 3947) |
| Message | While the Federalist Party agrees with the first article, our party believes that article two is too restrictive and can lead to potential abuse of the governed by governing. As with article 3 we feel that the necessity of a warrant with sufficient evidence of suspicion is a valid enough reason to breach the confidentiality of correspondence. Lawrence Harding MP (F) |
| Date | 16:33:17, December 05, 2015 CET | From | National Progressive Union | To | Debating the Ethical Boundaries Act (October 3947) |
| Message | The NDP is in agreement with the Federalist party, at least on the stance of Article 3 (the inviolability of letters). Therefore, we shall be voting against this bill, as the party who authored it is no longer around to make changes. Robert Paine Chair of the National Democratic Party |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 153 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 447 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: RP laws follow the same passing rules as in-game variable laws. Laws that are not of a constitutional nature require a simple majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. Laws that are of a constitutional nature require a 2/3 majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. RP laws may be abolished a simple majority vote this applies to ANY RP law. |
| Random quote: "We never know the worth of water 'til the well is dry." - Thomas Fuller |