HOUSE BILL: Naturalization Act (Tabled) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 02:43:44 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  HOUSE BILL: Naturalization Act (Tabled) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: HOUSE BILL: Naturalization Act (Tabled)  (Read 4520 times)
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« on: March 16, 2017, 09:34:34 PM »

I'd like to hear the sponsor's reasoning behind section II part 5
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2017, 11:41:36 PM »

Before we change the bill, let's hear what the other representatives have to say.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #2 on: March 18, 2017, 08:49:32 PM »

As a former house member I do have something to say regarding this legislation. I support it with the proviso that section 2 clause 4 be changed to require English. As English is the lingua franca of Atlasia it would benefit immigrants to learn the language.

Forcing people to learn a language isn't freedom.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2017, 05:51:37 PM »

As a former house member I do have something to say regarding this legislation. I support it with the proviso that section 2 clause 4 be changed to require English. As English is the lingua franca of Atlasia it would benefit immigrants to learn the language.

Forcing people to learn a language isn't freedom.

Even liberal democracies have understood that people need to lern the language in order to become real citizens of the country. This is about integration. We don't want minorities to live in parallel societies within our country, we want them to be included in our social, cultural and political life. Parallel societies lead to crime, integration doesn't.

Well, if we want to really stop parallel societies from forming, we should force the 41 million Spanish speaking people to learn the language.

Conforming people into a set way of living is not a noble pursuit, diversity in culture should be tolerated and encouraged.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #4 on: March 19, 2017, 09:16:37 PM »

As a former house member I do have something to say regarding this legislation. I support it with the proviso that section 2 clause 4 be changed to require English. As English is the lingua franca of Atlasia it would benefit immigrants to learn the language.

Forcing people to learn a language isn't freedom.

Even liberal democracies have understood that people need to lern the language in order to become real citizens of the country. This is about integration. We don't want minorities to live in parallel societies within our country, we want them to be included in our social, cultural and political life. Parallel societies lead to crime, integration doesn't.

Well, if we want to really stop parallel societies from forming, we should force the 41 million Spanish speaking people to learn the language.

Conforming people into a set way of living is not a noble pursuit, diversity in culture should be tolerated and encouraged.

I know. That is true. But no one is talking about cultural diversity. We don't want to force people to live in a certain way. We just want them to have basic knowledge of the language we use in our political process and, well, basically everywhere.

If they want that, I believe they should be able to do that of their own free will.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #5 on: March 20, 2017, 02:27:11 PM »

I object to the amendment.

I am afraid I agree with Simossad.


It is not safe for them either. They will be stuck unable to obtain better pay, subject to abuse by employers, tenants and criminals. They won't be able to reach out to the authorities effectively or will be told lies about the authorities to keep them from reaching out to get help.

We are talking about the naturalization process here. If we want all citizens to succeed and be able to have an equal shot at achieving success, understanding the basics of the language and even of the system that will protect them and their rights, is critical.

Immigrants who want to succeed in this nation will do so anyway, we don't need government mandates on everything because it would help someone. For once, can we be honest with ourselves and say that people can protect their own interests, and don't need big brother government to hold their hands in every decision? Provide an English course, but make it optional.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2017, 03:14:19 PM »

I object to the amendment.

I am afraid I agree with Simossad.


It is not safe for them either. They will be stuck unable to obtain better pay, subject to abuse by employers, tenants and criminals. They won't be able to reach out to the authorities effectively or will be told lies about the authorities to keep them from reaching out to get help.

We are talking about the naturalization process here. If we want all citizens to succeed and be able to have an equal shot at achieving success, understanding the basics of the language and even of the system that will protect them and their rights, is critical.

Immigrants who want to succeed in this nation will do so anyway, we don't need government mandates on everything because it would help someone. For once, can we be honest with ourselves and say that people can protect their own interests, and don't need big brother government to hold their hands in every decision? Provide an English course, but make it optional.

Can we clarify our different viewpoints on that issue by proposing an amendment that does not make the ability to speak the English language compulsory, but that determines that the required formalities and paperwork of the naturalization process are in the English language?

That's contradictory.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #7 on: March 20, 2017, 08:42:35 PM »

I object to the amendment.

I am afraid I agree with Simossad.


It is not safe for them either. They will be stuck unable to obtain better pay, subject to abuse by employers, tenants and criminals. They won't be able to reach out to the authorities effectively or will be told lies about the authorities to keep them from reaching out to get help.

We are talking about the naturalization process here. If we want all citizens to succeed and be able to have an equal shot at achieving success, understanding the basics of the language and even of the system that will protect them and their rights, is critical.

Immigrants who want to succeed in this nation will do so anyway, we don't need government mandates on everything because it would help someone. For once, can we be honest with ourselves and say that people can protect their own interests, and don't need big brother government to hold their hands in every decision? Provide an English course, but make it optional.

Can we clarify our different viewpoints on that issue by proposing an amendment that does not make the ability to speak the English language compulsory, but that determines that the required formalities and paperwork of the naturalization process are in the English language?

That's contradictory.

Then how many languages do you want to offer?

Spanish, Chinese, Russian, German, French, and English. If someone doesn't speak those languages, it won't be hard to find someone already living here to translate into that language.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2017, 10:28:55 PM »

I think this is a pretty good piece of legislation as is.

Yeah, I agree that the original version is the best.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #9 on: March 22, 2017, 01:43:01 PM »

Nay.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #10 on: March 27, 2017, 11:49:22 AM »

Motion for a final vote.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2017, 04:18:52 PM »

Good amendment.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #12 on: March 29, 2017, 12:25:06 PM »

I have an idea everyone and I'll share it later on.

The suspense is killing me.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #13 on: March 29, 2017, 10:04:30 PM »

I object to the amendment
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2017, 03:54:48 PM »

Okay, while it would seem clear that enduro was objecting to OneJ's latest amendment, it was within the last three hours of the objection period of H5:21. Therefore just to be safe, am I correct in assuming the objection is aimed at the latest amendment and not the previous one? 

Yes.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #15 on: April 03, 2017, 01:44:49 PM »

Nay
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #16 on: April 11, 2017, 04:22:40 PM »

I'm gonna hold off on motioning for a final vote. I don't quite know what's going on with this.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


« Reply #17 on: April 16, 2017, 05:08:57 PM »

I'll assume sponsorship.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.039 seconds with 12 queries.