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: No Federal Marriage
Details
Submitted by[?]: Restoration 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: August 2071
Description[?]:
| Each state should decide this on their own. Look at how different each state is with regards to their views on religion, morality, and the like. This is tearing our poor federation apart. Let's compromise by letting the states decide and then we'll just recognise all contracts on the federal level! |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy toward marriage.
Old value:: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Current: The government does not involve itself in marriage or civil unions.
Proposed: Civil marriages are defined by local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:47:52, June 23, 2005 CET | From | Restoration Party | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | kind of a libertarian dillemma, but we need to distinguish ourselves somehow! |
| Date | 23:00:27, June 23, 2005 CET | From | Zuman Independence Party | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | No, we are tolerant. |
| Date | 23:02:08, June 23, 2005 CET | From | Alliance for Natural Law | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | Nope, "except for the most basic of human rights." sez our platform. However if you wanted to abolish civil marriage altogether, that would be fine and a different matter. |
| Date | 23:06:42, June 23, 2005 CET | From | Restoration Party | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | mmm...it s kind of the same thing! |
| Date | 23:37:47, June 23, 2005 CET | From | Restoration Party | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | OOC: I m glad that we are all so tolerant! |
| Date | 23:46:30, June 23, 2005 CET | From | Red and Green Bloc | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | A thinly veiled attack on the rights of gay couples, no way |
| Date | 06:11:32, June 24, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party of Valruzia | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | No it isn't |
| Date | 15:51:01, June 24, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party of Valruzia | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | and how is marriage a basic human right, really? |
| Date | 17:13:43, June 24, 2005 CET | From | Restoration Party | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | The Federation government will never allow states to ban anything between two consenting couples. But the crazies in the backwards provinces get all upset, so we think its best to let the kingdo...er states define that themselves and then we can all move on for awhile... |
| Date | 01:56:54, June 25, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party of Valruzia | To | Debating the No Federal Marriage |
| Message | Well, might as well vote yes since we do believe federal government should have nothing to do with marriage anyway. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 35 | |||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 139 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 1 |
| Random fact: References to prominent real-life persons are not allowed. This includes references to philosophies featuring the name of a real-life person (eg. "Marxism", "Thatcherism", "Keynesianism"). |
| Random quote: "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." - H. L. Mencken |