Affirmative Consent in Post-Secondary Education Act of 2015 (Final vote)

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Also not a Senator, but I would like to say that the notion of a university acting as the trier of fact in allegations of criminal malfeasance is preposterous. Suppose a rape occurs and the aggressor is suspended or expelled; they are essentially loosing a violent criminal out into the world to strike again.

     Something that I plan to do for my region in my capacity as a Legislator, and I would encourage the Senate to do the same, is to require universities to report all accusations of criminal acts to law enforcement. If someone commits a crime, they should have to face actual criminal penalties.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I object to the amendment. It implies that for sexual assault to occur than they must be physical resistance

     Courts have not held that to be the case for decades. We hardly need a line in a new bill to explicitly deny it.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I object to the amendment. It implies that for sexual assault to occur than they must be physical resistance

     Courts have not held that to be the case for decades. We hardly need a line in a new bill to explicitly deny it.

It's not an issue of courts, its an issue of public perception

     So upholding the status quo in this area by remaining mum on it and dealing with the underlying issue through other means creates a perception of launching a reactionist attack on sexual assault victims? I am incredulous.

[Associate Justice PiT]

There is a thread in the main page to present views and formal submissions

Main Page? The AFE board is not the main page. The AFE board is the board where the elections game aspect of Atlasia is conducted.

The purpose of said thread's creation was to provide a vehicle for greater interest in the Senate's discourse, not to compartmentalize and cast aside the opinions of private citizens to that they can be ignored by the Senate. This place has a long history of being out of touch on a variety of issues, the most recent example being the previous Amendment ratification. Suppressing public interest and input is not in the chamber's best interests.

     The issue is that while people take issue with the Senate for pushing some ridiculous ideas, there are never any consequences. The same folks keep winning easily. Something has to change with that.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Windjammer, don't you mean fail? I see way more Nays than Ayes.

As for the reasonable doubt wording... why? I mean, I understand it is very hard to prove cases of rape or assault, but it's hard to prove anything. The standard exists because, as a country, we believe that people are innocent until proven guilty. Not "suspected mostly guilty." I don't know what the balance is, but "50%+1 evidence" isn't fair either.

     I would point out that you are talking about applying criminal standards to deal with criminal accusations. If anything is unfair, it's treating very serious crimes as if they were internal university matters in the same fashion as cheating on an exam.