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: Our Moral Fibre
Details
Submitted by[?]: Likaton Coalition of the Willing
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: December 2272
Description[?]:
| In light of the Ban on religion, it is important that we do not abandon morality. Our people need guidance, and as such, we present this Bill before the Convocation. |
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: Divorces are legal, be it mutual consent, grounded cause or if one partner wants it.
Proposed: Divorces are only legal with grounded cause (such as adultery, or violence).
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Military stance on homosexuality.
Old value:: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Current: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Proposed: Open homosexuality is not tolerated in the military. The military has a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on public nudity.
Old value:: There are no laws with regards to public nudity, it is allowed.
Current: Public nudity is illegal, but private nudist colonies and beaches are permitted.
Proposed: Public nudity is illegal, but private nudist colonies and beaches are permitted.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The distribution, purchasing and possession of material depicting pornographic acts.
Old value:: Pornography depicting consenting adults is legal for adults.
Current: Pornography depicting consenting adults is legal for adults.
Proposed: All forms of pornography are illegal.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change Displays of public affection and obscenity laws.
Old value:: There are no laws regarding obscene public acts.
Current: Sexual intercourse is illegal in public.
Proposed: All sexually implicit actions are illegal in public.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change Sexual education in schools.
Old value:: Schools have an obligation to give sexual education at some point in puberty.
Current: Schools have an obligation to give sexual education at some point in puberty, but individual students have an opt-out option.
Proposed: Schools should not educate students in sexual matters.
Article 7
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding sexually explicit material on broadcast television.
Old value:: All sexually explicit material is allowed on television.
Current: Sexually explicit material is allowed, but violent or hard core pornography is banned.
Proposed: Sexually explicit material is not allowed, but nudity that is not sexually explicit is.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 15:05:39, August 19, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Intellectual Party | To | Debating the Our Moral Fibre |
| Message | Some of these proposals are ridiculous. People who talk about moral fibre and such generally just want to force their views (which seem to be prejudice against homosexuals and have a real problem dealing with sex). Secondly religion is not the best place to look for good morals, as must have some very questionable things in them. |
| Date | 18:07:08, August 19, 2006 CET | From |  Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the Our Moral Fibre |
| Message | Whilst we fundamentally respect the views of the Intellectual Party, we feel that it is improper of them to accuse us of trying to force our views, when we are participating in a genuine and fair democratic process, meaning that if the consensus agrees witht he views, they pass. Secondly, we have no predjudice against homosexuality, however if we are allowing 'outed' military personal, we feel the effects would be just as damaging as unisex barracks. While it may not be 'right' to ask that gay servicemen and women keep their sexuality discrete, is it any more right to ask the heterosexual majority to accept close proximity to a belief/orientation that makes them uncomfortable? Untiul society as a whole is more ccepting, those that we charge with defence of our nation need our support, not our political correctness gone mad. Whilst religion may not be perfect, it does tend towards a moral structure. I am certain that the Intellectuals can see that morals are never good or bad, merely different, and it is only our socially constructed perspectives that gives them those attributes. As a society, we construct our own morals, and if not from religion, then wemust impose a non-religious code, to avoid moral anarchy and degradation of public order and decency. |
| Date | 01:02:07, August 20, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Intellectual Party | To | Debating the Our Moral Fibre |
| Message | We were not suggesting that you would try to use force or other illegal tactics but these are quite conservative views, such as the banning of all pornography. Why? What is wrong with pornography? Obviously, there are some types of pornograhpy that should be banned, but surely not all. And for the proposal about divorce, can the fact that two people do not love each other not be enough of a reason? Is it better for them to remain in a loveless marriage? As for not teaching sex education schools, this is ridiculous. The best way to combat STDs and unwanted pregnancies is with knowledge and facts, not with little pieces of information that children will pick up from their friends or television. As for homosexuality in the military there is no reason why soldiers should not be open about their sexuality. We expect them to fight and die for us, yet you do not want them to be honest with their fellow soldiers, to make them live a lie. |
| Date | 02:43:29, August 20, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the Our Moral Fibre |
| Message | How naive. "People who talk about moral fibre and such generally just want to force their views" We do not. Who is to say what is 'acceptable' pornography? Why should women (or men) be forced to have to degrade themselves for money? If you aren't willing to commit to a marriage, don't get married. If you do commit, work at it. Marriage is a legal, lifetime contract. People shouldn't be able to weasel out of other contracts, why this one? The best way in your opinion. In ours, the best way to stop teenagers having sex is not to tell them about it. I would love for homosexuals in the services to be honest and open about their sexual preferences, but if the cost is making the heterosexual majority uncomfortable, then that is too higher price. A persons sexual proclivities should not be of issue in the workplace, so asking that they are not discussed isn't such a huge issue. |
| Date | 11:52:24, August 20, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Intellectual Party | To | Debating the Our Moral Fibre |
| Message | "the best way to stop teenagers having sex is not to tell them about it" that is ludicrous, people will grow up thinking things like if you shower after sex you won't get pregnant, that only gay people can catch AIDS and other silly ideas. No one is forced is be in pornography, it is their body to decide what to do with. There is nothing wrong with sex. Marriage is a different kind of contract, based on love, if there is no love, then surely the contract is null and void. I am sure that in every workplace a person's sexuality will come up at one point, and it is wrong to make somebody lie about it. If soldiers were uncomfortable about the race or religion of another soldier, that would be considered silly, why is this any different? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 109 | ||
| no | Total Seats: 175 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 217 |
| Random fact: Parties have the ability to endorse another party's candidate for the Head of State election (if there is one). This adds a strategic element to the elections. |
| Random quote: "Global warmers predict that global warming is coming, and our emissions are to blame. They do that to keep us worried about our role in the whole thing. If we aren't worried and guilty, we might not pay their salaries. It's that simple." - Kary Mullis |