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: Civil Union Act II
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic Socialist 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: November 2076
Description[?]:
| The Civil Union Act will legally recognise an act of civil union or marriage between adults (those aged18 or over). |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy toward marriage.
Old value:: The government only recognises civil marriages between a man and a woman.
Current: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Proposed: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:15:51, July 02, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | Hell no! |
| Date | 19:42:54, July 02, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | Hell yes! It was only because the SDP was away and PP flip-flopped her vote that you won last time! |
| Date | 19:50:07, July 02, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | We won't support it because marriage is between one man and one woman not between two men or between two women. |
| Date | 03:28:20, July 03, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | And don't forget that DVA wasn't online either because he's on vacation. The bill still would've passed if DVA wasn't on vacation. |
| Date | 03:43:52, July 03, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Free-Market Republican Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | I will not support this bill under any circumstances! Homosexuality is an abomination upon the human race, and I will not have our government endorsing it! |
| Date | 17:33:30, July 03, 2005 CET | From | Republican Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | We opposse. There was a voting. |
| Date | 18:33:18, July 03, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | It appears to me that the NCRP won't support many bills "under any circumstances". Perhaps he should make it his catch-phrase, although I personally prefer "The NCRP - Putting the "mental" back in "fundamentalism"!" May I ask why you changed your vote, PP? |
| Date | 02:25:02, July 04, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Free-Market Republican Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | DSP, it is clear that you have lost, if you have to resort to personal attacks against me. |
| Date | 02:53:23, July 04, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | Because I conflicted with my morals to much. Marriage is sacred between one man and one woman (of course it depends on culture)! |
| Date | 04:29:20, July 04, 2005 CET | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | no |
| Date | 13:04:35, July 04, 2005 CET | From | Republican Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | We should have some rulles against debating same topic all the time. There was consensus. |
| Date | 18:39:02, July 04, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | PP: Only allowing heterosexual marriages means that gay couples lose out on fundamental rights which married people take for granted. Doesn't denying people their rights on the basis of sexual orientation conflict with any of your morals? NFMRP: Learn to take a joke. RP: There was not consenus, very few parties voted. This has passed by a large majority before, and other attempts to reverse this have failed miserably. Until PP's puzzling U-turn, there was almost consensus in favour of gay marriage. |
| Date | 19:06:32, July 04, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | Civil unions bring these rights to partners: - hospital visitation - claiming the body of a deceased partner - attending a partners funeral - domestic partnership benefits - homestead exemptions - child support and alimony - loss or acquisition of citizenship - child custody/parental rights - inheritance rights - several company employee care schemes Why should they not be open to all? |
| Date | 19:44:44, July 04, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Free-Market Republican Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | DSP: I was in a bad mood, when I'm angry, I don't take jokes very well, sorry. |
| Date | 21:25:01, July 04, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | It's OK, if you felt that joke was out of order, I'm sorry. |
| Date | 21:51:56, July 04, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | ok first of all, though this doesn't affect me, specify which RP party. We have too. The Republican Party and the Rightist party. Next, Gay marriage conflicts with my morals. Heterosexual marriage does not. |
| Date | 17:28:34, July 05, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Free-Market Republican Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | DSP, looking back in a good mood, it was funny. :D However, I browse the NS General Forum a lot, and every other thread is bashing my God and my religion, and it gets on my nerves. Other than that, I'm really not in the mood to debate. Maybe later. |
| Date | 18:39:04, July 05, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | NFMRP: I've just given up on the General forums for political debate, it gets on my nerves too. If you join an alliance in NS with forums of their own, it's usually a lot more fun to debate there. PP: I meant the Republican Party, as they were the last people to speak. Anyway, you may not believe that gay marriage is sanctioned in Christianity or your own religion. However, surely if two men or women love each other, shouldn't they receive the same rights as a heterosexual couple? I know you understand this because you've voted for this before. |
| Date | 18:39:17, July 05, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | This will go to vote later tonight. |
| Date | 20:32:39, July 05, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Free-Market Republican Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | DSP, what nation are you? |
| Date | 20:40:59, July 05, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | Demo-Bobylon |
| Date | 20:43:23, July 05, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | And I'm sure PP wouldn't mind if I told you she is Formal Dances in NS. If you do mind, PP, sorry! |
| Date | 23:00:29, July 05, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | He already knows my nation DSP! |
| Date | 16:18:20, July 06, 2005 CET | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Civil Union Act II |
| Message | PP and NFMRP (and also me) are all memebrs of the Greater Prussian Empire on NS. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 115 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 116 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 68 |
| Random fact: There is a phpBB forum dedicated to Particracy. Please click the Forum link in the top game menu. Additions to the game, suggestions and discussion is held there so get involved. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: “Tell these old, grey men that their time is over. Tell them to give us back our future, and then get lost!” - Benji Benandez, former Dranian politician |