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: Anti-Cloning Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progressive Conservative 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: May 4045
Description[?]:
| This bill prevents the cloning of human beings. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards the cloning of human beings.
Old value:: Research in cloning technologies is legal, but regulated.
Current: Research in cloning technologies is legal, but regulated.
Proposed: The cloning of human beings is illegal.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 04:35:14, June 16, 2016 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Anti-Cloning Act |
| Message | While the Neoconservative Party appreciates that cloning research is currently regulated, we feel that the government must go further by making it illegal for human beings to be cloned. There are simply not enough societal benefits of human cloning to justify the risks that this practice poses. |
| Date | 17:35:01, June 16, 2016 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anti-Cloning Act |
| Message | The Neo-Democratic Party fully believes in the potential for research, learning, and breakthroughs that cloning technologies possess. |
| Date | 23:45:43, June 16, 2016 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Anti-Cloning Act |
| Message | The Neo-Democratic Party by result of that position also supports opening up a whole host of problems that result when humans ignore the limitations of nature on human reproduction. Aside from the fact that cloning research will almost certainly result in the destruction of countless human embryos and clones born with serious birth defects, the whole principle of cloning human beings violates the defining characteristic of what it means to be human. Humans are intended to be unique individuals with unique DNA, but cloning removes the uniqueness of each individual and by a result lowers that individual's sense of worth. What benefits of cloning could possibly outweigh the risk of creating a society in which sameness dominates? |
| Date | 07:27:18, June 17, 2016 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anti-Cloning Act |
| Message | We think that the downsides the Neoconservative Party is pointing out are dealt with by the second clause of the law: "but regulated." The Neoconservative Party can work to regulate the cloning activities as they seem fit, but it will still be legal, and quite beneficial to the science and medicine communities. |
| Date | 07:54:22, June 17, 2016 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Anti-Cloning Act |
| Message | The NDP has still failed to present a reason why the scientific community needs to be researching technologies that would allow for the cloning of human beings. The Neiconservative Party takes no issues with the cloning of animals, but when it comes human beings, we still hold that there is no justifiable reason for scientists to be considering cloning technologies. The Neoconservative Party is not anti-science and we are not looking to outlaw this practice for religious reasons. We just feel that until the parties voting against this measure can justify why our country needs to permit research into human cloning, it is common sense to protect value of each human as a unique individual in our society. |
| Date | 18:35:46, June 17, 2016 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anti-Cloning Act |
| Message | What about the cloning of internal organs to be used as replacements (i.e. hearts, livers, lungs, etc.)? |
| Date | 04:13:18, June 18, 2016 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Anti-Cloning Act |
| Message | We assume the Neo-Democratic Party is referring to the practice of therapeutic cloning? And if this assumption is correct, our goal with this bill was to ban reproductive human cloning. Therapeutic cloning which commonly is used to produced those internal organ replacements is an entirely different issue. |
| Date | 04:37:03, June 18, 2016 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anti-Cloning Act |
| Message | OOC: I don't think therapeutic cloning is covered in the laws of this game, so I was rolling that into this law. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 287 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 463 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In cases where players introduce RP laws to a nation and then leave, Moderation reserves the discretion to declare the RP laws void if they appear to have fallen into disuse. In particular, please bear in mind that a player who is inexperienced with Particracy role-play and has joined a nation as the only party there should not generally be expected to abide by RP laws implemented by previous players who have been and left. |
| Random quote: "If God made man they say Sam Colt made them equal." - Unknown |