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: Adoption Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX
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: September 2185
Description[?]:
| A bill to loosen regulations surrounding adoptive parents. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning adoption.
Old value:: Adoption is strictly regulated by the government. Only by passing several tests and by following an intensive program applicants can adopt children.
Current: Adoption is regulated by the government. Applicants can adopt after a routine check-up.
Proposed: Regulation is used to screen out only those with a previous history of child abuse.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:54:30, February 10, 2006 CET | From |  Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Adoption Act |
| Message | 1. Adoptive parents should not be treated differently to naturally-conceiving parents because of whatever difference that causes the former to adopt. 2. Naturally-conceiving parents are allowed to have children with no restrictions. 3. The government cannot be responsible for child abuse. Therefore, we propose the above as a change to the nature of adoption. |
| Date | 20:31:22, February 10, 2006 CET | From | Baltusian Pantian Alliance | To | Debating the Adoption Act |
| Message | In response to number 2 there is a restriction its a nine month waiting period also a birth mother has to deal with strech marks and naturally feeding the baby it basically acts as a screening process to see who is strong willed enough to continue care for the child. |
| Date | 11:19:31, February 11, 2006 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Adoption Act |
| Message | Any other comments? |
| Date | 02:47:43, February 12, 2006 CET | From | Libertad y Justicia | To | Debating the Adoption Act |
| Message | I agree with the proposition. But I have issue with reason number 3. While it is true that, in the base sense of the meaning, the government cannot be responsible for child abuse, it is also true that the main task of the government is to protect its citizens from harm. Because children cannot protect themselves, the government has more of a responsibility to make sure that they are okay. Thus, the idea of protecting children from abuse shouldn't stand exclusive to adoption; rather, it should stretch across the board to ALL Children, in ALL situations, PERIOD. I don't, however, think that child abuse is a major problem in our nation. So I don't think an independent bill should be issued to cover child abuse unless it becomes a major problem (obviously our current system of protection is doing its job). |
| Date | 13:09:43, February 13, 2006 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Alliance | To | Debating the Adoption Act |
| Message | Is this not the party that wanted parents to be monitored? |
| Date | 03:43:57, February 15, 2006 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Adoption Act |
| Message | We just wanted parents, adoptive and natural, to be treated equally. We were attempting to do so. We merely wished parents to be "monitored" if they proved unfit to be parents or avoided a simple test, putting them through similar rigour as adoptive parents. Either way is fine with us but the latter proved too controversial. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 156 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 205 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Hundreds of vessels were lost while traversing the cold waters of the Sea of Lost Souls. It is located between Seleya and Majatra. |
| Random quote: "You don't have to explain something you never said." - Calvin Coolidge |