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: Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty
Details
Submitted by[?]: Proletariat Revolution Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill proposes for the ratification of a treaty. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor[?]. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: June 2183
Description[?]:
| This bill asks for the ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty. If this treaty is ratified, it becomes binding and will define national law. |
Proposals
Article 1
Ratify the International Gay Rights treaty.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:11:10, February 07, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | We already have the elements in the treaty legalised in our nation, this would just confirm our stance internationally. |
| Date | 05:30:13, February 07, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | AMA agrees with this Treaty. AMA thoroughly endorses the merits of this Treaty. AMA introduced this very Treaty, many years ago. We also introduced the legislation to overturn this Treaty. It may sound like a dichotomy... but AMA has to serve two masters... the people of Likatonia, who elect us to protect their rights... AND the government of Likatonia, which has to ensure that we do not lose our sovereignty to outside powers. Gay Rights are very important to AMA. We fight to defend and protect them at every turn... but we cannot support legislation that allows outside bodies to make that choice FOR us. |
| Date | 06:10:28, February 07, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Fascist Front | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | Another attack on our moral bastion by stealth. Currently there is no discrimination within Likatonia - that we are aware of. So we adopt this treaty and then what? We make things even less than discriminatory than they already are? In the meantime we are answerable to the minions of faceless international do-gooders and snivel rights apologists that we have to be watching for impacts on Likatonian legislation all the time ? This is a case of putting a pot of non issue on the stove and waiting for previous acceptence to boil over in a cloud of pointless resentment. This is a pointless treaty over an non-issue that binds us needlessly. Needless to say we oppose. |
| Date | 14:18:37, February 07, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | We agree with what we think is the position of the AMA. While we fully support the current laws in place, we do not wish to see future lawmakers restricted in what they can propose and pass. Therefore, we must oppose this treaty. |
| Date | 18:30:40, February 07, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | So, you're saying that rights are rescindable? You're supporting the possibility of voluntarily stripping people of their rights simply because 'future lawmakers' may oppose homosexuality? |
| Date | 19:22:54, February 07, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | Yes, rights are assuredly revokable -anything the government can grant it can take away. We would not support the removal of any person's rights, as you can tell from our voting in the past. One of the rights we must support, however, is the right of future lawmakers to vote as they please, even if they are voting for something we find reprehensible. Likatonian lawmakers need to vote on the basis of their own beliefs and those of their consituants, not the beliefs of some amorphous "international community'. |
| Date | 21:41:50, February 07, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | Indeed - RLP reiterates pretty much the AMA position. We have fought to protect rights, and, while there IS an Anakrousite faction in Likatonia, we shall continue to do so. However, a nation must be what it CLAIMS to be... and we CLAIM to be democratic... and we CLAIM to be sovereign. If we, then, hand over our sovereignty in this matter, are we not making a lie of our sovereignty? If we, then, create a regid restriction which sets IN ADVANCE what the government can propose to the Convocation, are we not making a lie of our democracy? The AMA welcomes discussion on the debate of gender in Likatonia. And, our position is known - we favour maximum freedom in this manenr of issue, and minimum intrusion. But, we welcome the OPTION for another party to bring this issues TO the Convocation... because that is the only FAIR way, that we can see, that constituents CAN BE represented. |
| Date | 00:59:18, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Fascist Front | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | This is indeed a difficult issue for the new PSS. Regardless of content of the treaty we are somewhat driven by some residual isolationist feeling within the party. However, the goals of the treaty are desirable for us and we NOW see the benefit of enshrining these positive ideals to an authority higher than a national government. When these are entrusted to a collective of nations the intentions of the treaty will not be diluted by transient national government that may be hostile. OOC: TOTAL and PSS now happily accept the olympic medal for worlds biggest backflip. |
| Date | 01:19:33, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | OOC: The AM AAP cannot totally disclaim back-flippery on this issue, either... after all, we pushed this Treaty the FIRST time around... and THEN, pushed through revocation of the very same Treaty... |
| Date | 11:55:46, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the International Gay Rights treaty |
| Message | This Treaty has lost a lot of member nations in the past two decades, we in the CP are sure that it once had over twenty members. Perhaps we are wrong, but woot anyway. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 117 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 383 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Alduria, Rildanor and Lourenne all have Canrilaise (French) cultures. |
| Random quote: "Modern technology owes ecology an apology." - Alan M. Eddison |