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: Lex Tecia de Divortio
Details
Submitted by[?]: Factio Republicana Socialistica
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: April 4423
Description[?]:
| Tekian Law on Divorce Senators, The Republican Party and the current administration is fully supportive of the women's strike on National Women's Day (http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1585&start=700) and all governing parties remain fully committed to ending gender inequality. On that we are in complete agreement with our coalition partners. What we sadly fail to agree on is the fact that one of the main causes of the feminization of poverty is no-fault divorce. Our party has always been committed to the importance of marriage in a Republic. The main role and the telos of marriage is raising virtuous children who will then become the virtuous citizens of tomorrow. It is for this reason that we emphatically support same-sex marriage, and it is also because of this that we oppose family breakdown and all the negative consequences of rising divorce rates, which, while beneficial for some women, is deeply harmful for homemakers and poorer women. Senators, no fault divorce is bad for women, bad for men, and bad for children. In a misunderstood and destructive understanding of freedom liberalism has destroyed the social fabric necessary for civic virtue. Whereas freedom once meant the right to live a good life, to strive for excellence, and to pursue happiness, now it just means the right to do whatever you like, no matter how many lives you destroy in the process. And the clearest symptom of this liberal disease is treating marriage like a simple restaurant experience, where you can just order whatever you like and send it back if you reconsider. Divorce destroys marriage, and the destruction of marriage causes harm to all parties. Nobody comes out of a divorce a happier and freer person, and it is no-fault divorce that causes the most harm. No-fault divorce harms women because it has a disproportionate negative impact on them. Unilateral no-fault divorce forces women who are secondary earners, and most women are and want to be secondary earners, to make the impossible choice between seeing their children and supporting their children. It leaves women destitute and lacking resources to raise the children whose custody they are forced to fight for, as men will often agree to forgo a custody battle if the woman agrees to a smaller financial settlement. Unilateral divorce forces women to seek to join the workforce against their will and sacrifice their time with their children, and many married women work outside the home to avoid such situations should they ever find themselves abandoned by their husbands. No-fault divorce is bad for men, as it deprives them of custody over their children even when they have done nothing wrong. Courts almost always award custody to women, even when it is the woman that is at fault for initiating divorce and the man is innocent. It is un-feminist to not see the gender inequality and the lack of equal rights in these cases. And no-fault divorce is harmful for children. Children of divorced parents are worse off economically, more likely to divorce themselves, live a life of crime, drugs, illness, unemployment, abuse, alcohol, and smoking, and to die young. No-fault divorce is unjust to children and it literally takes lives. And most unjustly, no-fault divorce removes the right of children to grow in a stable home with two parents in a permanent bond to each other and to them. So if we truly want to end female poverty and income inequality, the feminist thing to do is to abolish no-fault divorce and instead require the party initiating divorce to prove the other party's fault in the breakup of marital relations. Moveover, given that traditional judicial practices under family law fail to uncover deep causes of disagreement and effectively silence women, we propose the introduction of restorative justice principles to resolve family disputes prior to the initiation of court proceedings, irrespective of the cause cited for family breakdown. Under this proposal the parties in a family dispute will be required by the court to undergo restorative justice family circles, presided by a qualified mediator, where each party will be allowed to bring extended family, friends, and supporters to the table, enhancing the group's decisionmaking and moving from punitive towards restorative family law. If the restorative justice circle fails to reconcile differences, then the couple may seek a divorce after a period of two years of separation. Additionally, in cases of infidelity or abuse, including mental abuse, whether brought to the attention of the court by the aggrieved party or uncovered during restorative justice circles, the aggrieved party may seek an immediate divorce and the offending party will be required by law to provide compensation. Aquilina Teke Senatrix |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The legality of divorces (if marriages are recognised).
Old value:: Divorces are legal, be it mutual consent, grounded cause or if one partner wants it.
Current: Only divorces that comply with religious doctrine are legal.
Proposed: Divorces are only legal with grounded cause (such as adultery, or violence).
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:24:54, July 13, 2018 CET | From | Clara Aurora - COSIRA | To | Debating the Lex Tecia de Divortio |
| Message | We thank our Republican partners for their public support to the Feminist march, but once again we have to strongly disagree with this proposal. Marriage is a social construct, and it is not a guarantee of stability. A couple that keeps arguing day after day will affect more to their children that divorced parents that keep a healthy relationship and position towards them. It has no sense to talk about ending female poverty and inequality by ending with the right of people to decide when to stop a relationship with other people. To force those who just cannot stand each other because their convivence has failed to keep seeing each other for a certain period of time will only lead to more hatred, while allowing them to take different roads and to rethink about their own lifes will be beneficial for everyone. Samara Klotis Senatrix |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 221 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 352 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 177 |
| Random fact: You can inactivate yourself on your User Page. You will then lose all your seats but your party account won't be deleted, and your party's Visibility ratings will not diminish. Reactivation can be requested in the "Reactivation Requests" thread in the Game Moderation section of the Particracy Forum. |
| Random quote: "He who turns his back on the left, looks at the right." - Johan Vande Lanotte |