Public Office of the Leinad/Lumine Administration - Goodbye, Farewell, and Amen
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 10:19:18 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Public Office of the Leinad/Lumine Administration - Goodbye, Farewell, and Amen
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Author Topic: Public Office of the Leinad/Lumine Administration - Goodbye, Farewell, and Amen  (Read 9239 times)
Mike Thick
tedbessell
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,085


Political Matrix
E: -6.65, S: -8.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: July 20, 2016, 02:48:24 PM »

Now, your definition of marriage is a reeeeeeeeeeal gem.

"Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two consenting persons to the exclusion of all others."

Which of you geniuses thought this up?  You have just opened the door to some 50 year old pervert to marry a six year old child.

Yup, that's quite the forward looking bill you have there.

Minors are unable to give legal consent in almost all senses of the term, so this is not how things will go.
Logged
Pragmatic Conservative
1184AZ
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,735


Political Matrix
E: 3.00, S: -0.41

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: July 20, 2016, 02:58:05 PM »

Oh yes, because a fine of $50,000,00 per day is soooooooo realistic.

If you are going to craft a fantasyland completely one sided bill, at least make it semi believable.

And your part about denying parental permission for what happens to their own minor children is so progressive.

Why don't you simply deny parents any and all authority over their minor children and take minors out of their homes and away from their parents and indoctrinate them with your preferred way of anything goes LGBTQ philosophy?

Clearly, the authors of this bill are pimply faced 14 year olds with absolutely no clue about parental/child relationships.  Why don't you just impose a fine of $100,000.00 per day for parents who want the right to care themselves for their minor children?

Now, your definition of marriage is a reeeeeeeeeeal gem.

"Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two consenting persons to the exclusion of all others."

Which of you geniuses thought this up?  You have just opened the door to some 50 year old pervert to marry a six year old child.

Yup, that's quite the forward looking bill you have there.
On the Marrige part it clearly states to consenting individuals, meaning your above scenario dosent happen, also we currently have laws governing at what age a person can give consent and it certainly is not 6 so your example is entirely unrealistic.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: July 20, 2016, 03:04:52 PM »

The legislation clearly states "two consenting persons".

You may want to go back to the books and change the wording so it is clear and unequivocal.

Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 20, 2016, 07:38:01 PM »

I recently signed the evergreen-Tmthforu94 LGBTQ+ Rights Act, because I feel that it's important for the government to treat people the same, and no one offered objections strong enough to convince me to veto the positive things this bill will do.
a beautiful day for atlasia Cheesy:D:D
Thank you, Mr. President!!! Smiley

It needs reworked. They gay community got everything they wanted and people of faith are left with no protections in said legislation.
Sure their are, individuals may decline to perform SS weddings based on religious beliefs.   

Not good enough.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 20, 2016, 07:48:33 PM »

The bill has been signed into law. You are welcome to introduce new legislation that would amend it and we can discuss those proposed changes.

*rant on*

You rammed this through while The social conservatives have been gone. We can't have laws passed when one group of Atlasians did not have an opportunity to speak on the subject. It would be like ramming an abortion ban while only prolife reps are in session.

*rant off*

I'm asking President Leinad to reconsider his signature to this legislation. Until serious reworking is done I will seek its repeal. Plus the regions should have final and absolute sovereignty on marriage. Not the federal government.

Logged
SUSAN CRUSHBONE
evergreen
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,735
Antarctica


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: July 20, 2016, 07:55:14 PM »

The bill has been signed into law. You are welcome to introduce new legislation that would amend it and we can discuss those proposed changes.

*rant on*

You rammed this through while The social conservatives have been gone. We can't have laws passed when one group of Atlasians did not have an opportunity to speak on the subject. It would be like ramming an abortion ban while only prolife reps are in session.

*rant off*

I'm asking President Leinad to reconsider his signature to this legislation. Until serious reworking is done I will seek its repeal. Plus the regions should have final and absolute sovereignty on marriage. Not the federal government.



a) cc was here
b) it passed by two votes

you lost. get over it.
Logged
Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,519
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: July 20, 2016, 09:16:35 PM »

*rant on*

You rammed this through while The social conservatives have been gone. We can't have laws passed when one group of Atlasians did not have an opportunity to speak on the subject. It would be like ramming an abortion ban while only prolife reps are in session.

*rant off*

I'm asking President Leinad to reconsider his signature to this legislation. Until serious reworking is done I will seek its repeal. Plus the regions should have final and absolute sovereignty on marriage. Not the federal government.


You can't count on Federalist leaders. Like on the death penalty issue, they had the votes to do something, propose amendments to keep it in some circumstances or let each region decides. No they voted for a total national ban. And they used to complain the federal government was solving issues for the whole country and removing topic for debate.
Logged
This account no longer in use.
cxs018
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,282


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: July 20, 2016, 09:36:35 PM »

I recently signed the evergreen-Tmthforu94 LGBTQ+ Rights Act, because I feel that it's important for the government to treat people the same, and no one offered objections strong enough to convince me to veto the positive things this bill will do.
a beautiful day for atlasia Cheesy:D:D
Thank you, Mr. President!!! Smiley

It needs reworked. They gay community got everything they wanted and people of faith are left with no protections in said legislation.

Protection from what?

The gay mafia, duh.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: July 20, 2016, 10:01:48 PM »

The bill has been signed into law. You are welcome to introduce new legislation that would amend it and we can discuss those proposed changes.

*rant on*

You rammed this through while The social conservatives have been gone. We can't have laws passed when one group of Atlasians did not have an opportunity to speak on the subject. It would be like ramming an abortion ban while only prolife reps are in session.

*rant off*

I'm asking President Leinad to reconsider his signature to this legislation. Until serious reworking is done I will seek its repeal. Plus the regions should have final and absolute sovereignty on marriage. Not the federal government.
The bill was left in queue for quite a while to gain feedback, and from that feedback, I proposed a "more acceptable" version of the bill in the Senate. I opened the vote in the Senate after it had been debated for MORE than the allotted time and it easily passed. I'm sorry you weren't able to actively participate, but we can't just bring legislation to a halt whenever someone goes on a LOA. There was also plenty of time for it to be debated in the House but no one bothered to make amendments, though I don't run the House. I only run the Senate.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: July 20, 2016, 11:09:11 PM »

Perhaps one of you who supported and voted for this legislation could explain to me how the government can legally pass legislation which takes away parental rights for what medical procedures their minor children undergo.

Explain to me what in the constitution states that the government has the right to carry out medical procedures on minor children without the consent of their parents.

And don't all of you run away from this inquiry at the same time.   
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: July 20, 2016, 11:30:57 PM »

We aren't going into uncharted territory, here. This lists instances when minors can seek treatment without parental consent, and there are others as well.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: July 20, 2016, 11:53:54 PM »


I repeat, is this right for the Senate to usurp parental rights embedded in the Atlasian constitution or is it not?
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: July 20, 2016, 11:55:21 PM »


I repeat, is this right for the Senate to usurp parental rights embedded in the Atlasian constitution or is it not?
What clause are you referring to?
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: July 21, 2016, 01:17:40 AM »
« Edited: July 21, 2016, 01:28:21 AM by Lincoln Republican »


I repeat, is this right for the Senate to usurp parental rights embedded in the Atlasian constitution or is it not?
What clause are you referring to?

Section 2, Part 2

Section 2. The Right to Security in One's Own Body

1. All insurers within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Atlasia shall be required to cover options for hormone replacement therapy and puberty blockers.

2. There shall be no requirement that parents or guardians consent to a minor accessing puberty blockers.

Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: July 21, 2016, 11:40:17 AM »


I repeat, is this right for the Senate to usurp parental rights embedded in the Atlasian constitution or is it not?
What clause are you referring to?

Section 2, Part 2

Section 2. The Right to Security in One's Own Body

1. All insurers within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Atlasia shall be required to cover options for hormone replacement therapy and puberty blockers.

2. There shall be no requirement that parents or guardians consent to a minor accessing puberty blockers.
Sorry, I should have been more specific. What part of the constitution are you referring to that guarantees parents/guardians the right to be able to consent on anything medical on their children?
Logged
SUSAN CRUSHBONE
evergreen
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,735
Antarctica


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: July 21, 2016, 01:27:06 PM »

winfield, why do you think parents should be able to withhold necessary medical care from their children?
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: July 21, 2016, 04:11:26 PM »


I repeat, is this right for the Senate to usurp parental rights embedded in the Atlasian constitution or is it not?
What clause are you referring to?

Section 2, Part 2

Section 2. The Right to Security in One's Own Body

1. All insurers within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Atlasia shall be required to cover options for hormone replacement therapy and puberty blockers.

2. There shall be no requirement that parents or guardians consent to a minor accessing puberty blockers.
Sorry, I should have been more specific. What part of the constitution are you referring to that guarantees parents/guardians the right to be able to consent on anything medical on their children?

My question is, IS there anything in the constitution that states that the Atlasian government has the right to usurp parental authority over minors?

I am not referring to any part of the constitution, simply IF THERE IS anything in the constitution, anywhere, that allows the government to usurp parental authority of their minors?
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: July 21, 2016, 05:35:15 PM »

It is hard to argue that something is "embedded in the constitution" then not have any part of the constitution to reference for that. I can ask you the same question: where in the constitution does it give parents the right to usurp medical decisions from minors? That being said, I'll fall back on Article V, Section I, because the right to life and liberty extend to all Atlasians, not just those who are 18 and over.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: July 21, 2016, 06:14:38 PM »

It is hard to argue that something is "embedded in the constitution" then not have any part of the constitution to reference for that. I can ask you the same question: where in the constitution does it give parents the right to usurp medical decisions from minors? That being said, I'll fall back on Article V, Section I, because the right to life and liberty extend to all Atlasians, not just those who are 18 and over.


In other words, your actions in usurping the authority of parents in matters relating to their minor children are ultra vires of the Atlasian constitution. 

Precedent is, clearly, that parents make the decisions in matters relating to their minor children.

Your using Article V, Section I in matters such as this is a stretch.

And it has become clear to me that this Senate is bound and determined to impose the radical gay agenda, and let me say, is determined to impose the radical LGBTQ agenda upon Atlasia, no matter what, legal or not.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: July 21, 2016, 06:17:29 PM »
« Edited: July 21, 2016, 07:27:27 PM by Lincoln Republican »

winfield, why do you think parents should be able to withhold necessary medical care from their children?

"They have been used by transgender children. Children can be prescribed puberty blockers, with their parent's permission, by an endocrinologist, usually after psychiatric or mental health evaluations. Puberty blockers take the form of a monthly injection. Currently, treatment including puberty blockers are not worldwide."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puberty_blocker

Logged
Mike Thick
tedbessell
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,085


Political Matrix
E: -6.65, S: -8.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: July 21, 2016, 06:20:46 PM »
« Edited: July 21, 2016, 07:18:51 PM by Ted Bessell, Bass God of the West »

And it has become clear to me that this Senate is bound and determined to impose the radical gay agenda, and let me say, is determined to impose the radical LGBTQ agenda upon Atlasia, no matter what, legal or not.


Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: July 21, 2016, 06:36:43 PM »

It is hard to argue that something is "embedded in the constitution" then not have any part of the constitution to reference for that. I can ask you the same question: where in the constitution does it give parents the right to usurp medical decisions from minors? That being said, I'll fall back on Article V, Section I, because the right to life and liberty extend to all Atlasians, not just those who are 18 and over.


In other words, your actions in usurping the authority of parents in matters relating to their minor children are ultra vires of the Atlasian constitution. 

Precedent is, clearly, that parents make the decisions in matters relating to their minor children.

Your using Article V, Section I in matters such as this is a stretch.

And it has become clear to me that this Senate is bound and determined to impose the radical gay agenda, and let me say, is determined to impose the radical LGBTQ agenda upon Atlasia, no matter what, legal or not.
As I have said multiple times and will continue to say, if you or others would like to offer an amended version of the legislation, you are welcome to do so. In terms of the Senate, it was adequately debated for more than the required time and was voted on without any objections. This wasn't shoved through - I performed as PPT as I was supposed to, so I'm unsure as to why people continue to specifically target the Senate.

In the time that those opposed to this bill have spent complaining about it after the fact, an amended version could have been offered and we could have already started the debate in Congress.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: July 21, 2016, 07:04:47 PM »

Precedent is, clearly, that parents make the decisions in matters relating to their minor children.

Please provide legal prcedent in Atlasia.

And it has become clear to me that this Senate is bound and determined to impose the radical gay agenda, and let me say, is determined to impose the radical LGBTQ agenda upon Atlasia, no matter what, legal or not

You discredit yourself. I voted for you once. Never again.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: July 21, 2016, 07:08:33 PM »

It is hard to argue that something is "embedded in the constitution" then not have any part of the constitution to reference for that. I can ask you the same question: where in the constitution does it give parents the right to usurp medical decisions from minors? That being said, I'll fall back on Article V, Section I, because the right to life and liberty extend to all Atlasians, not just those who are 18 and over.




In other words, your actions in usurping the authority of parents in matters relating to their minor children are ultra vires of the Atlasian constitution. 

Precedent is, clearly, that parents make the decisions in matters relating to their minor children.

Your using Article V, Section I in matters such as this is a stretch.

And it has become clear to me that this Senate is bound and determined to impose the radical gay agenda, and let me say, is determined to impose the radical LGBTQ agenda upon Atlasia, no matter what, legal or not.
As I have said multiple times and will continue to say, if you or others would like to offer an amended version of the legislation, you are welcome to do so. In terms of the Senate, it was adequately debated for more than the required time and was voted on without any objections. This wasn't shoved through - I performed as PPT as I was supposed to, so I'm unsure as to why people continue to specifically target the Senate.

In the time that those opposed to this bill have spent complaining about it after the fact, an amended version could have been offered and we could have already started the debate in Congress.

Senator tmth, now, you know as well as I do, that putting forward any amendments for the Senate in the matter of any changes to this radical LGBTQ legislation would fall on deaf ears, and be soundly voted down by the Senate.

Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: July 21, 2016, 07:25:34 PM »

Precedent is, clearly, that parents make the decisions in matters relating to their minor children.

Please provide legal prcedent in Atlasia.

And it has become clear to me that this Senate is bound and determined to impose the radical gay agenda, and let me say, is determined to impose the radical LGBTQ agenda upon Atlasia, no matter what, legal or not

You discredit yourself. I voted for you once. Never again.

1.  Legal precedent, please refer to the example cited by Senator tmth IRL situations in this matter to justify the usurpation of parental rights.  The same logic can be used for precedent IRL regarding parents and their minor children.  If you can use it, I can use it. 

2.  Well, thank you for your vote my friend.  Greatly appreciated.  You know, the right to choose who governs us is the very essence of democracy.  Also, the right to free and open debate on issues is fundamental to democracy, and, clearly, when one takes a stand on issues, they are bound to not please everyone, so I fully respect your decision not to vote for me ever again.  That is your right and your privilege.

And don't ever let anyone convince you to vote for me again.  Smiley
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.065 seconds with 11 queries.