NationStates

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:07 am**

Amenria agrees to repeal this vile law. Not because of grammatical errors, but because it is the right thing to do.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:09 am**

Imperial Siber wrote:Really? It's not even finished voting yet and your scared of people being able to marry who they want if the other person consents? Wow, homophobic much?

The majority of nations in Forest are voting against Marriage Equality because it is of too poor a standard to deserve a place in the statute books. We strongly deny that this implies homophobic attitudes on our part and dissociate ourselves from the attitudes of nations such as Uinted Communists of Africa. To avoid bigotry it is not necessary to support any and all proposals with egalitarian intent no matter how bad they are.

Uan aa Boa will support this repeal should the resolution pass, and I believe that many in our region will do likewise.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:26 am**

Seconded. Forest's objection (going by the discussions on the RMB) had nothing to do with not wanting gay people to marry and everything to do with the glaring spelling errors within it.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:36 am**

"as always the Republic is in complete disagreement with the un-european ideology of Imperium Anglorum''

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:24 am**

The Atlae Isles wrote:
Imperial Siber wrote:

Ok. When I said edit I meant this. Person takes current proposal, edits it, puts it back up for vote, then any reasons for grammar melt away and only people against its spirit will being voting against it. Outlawing heterosexual marriage is actually farther and extremes than outlawing marriage.

Well, that's clearly not going to happen. Editing a proposal at vote is impossible. You'd either have to let it pass and repeal it (but the spelling errors will still remain in the resolution list) or let it fail, re-draft (preferably peer-reviewed), then have delegates re-approve it and re-vote.

Additionally, we have other reasons for voting against it.

What may be extreme for one nation may be Tuesday in another. You may think that outlawing marriage altogether may be extreme, but to the country who has never heard of marriage or isn't interested in it, would it really be extreme? What would be extreme to them would be to suddenly introduce them to the concept and telling them to comply.

Albeit, those aren't my views. It also omits other marriage things, like interracial marriage. By our modern day standards, we consider that 'extreme.' But to the folks back in the olden days, homosexual marriage would be considered more 'extreme' than interracial marriage, thus it's an issue to them. Can you see how the current resolution isn't really comprehensive on the issue? As in too narrow.

I'll take an even closer look at this quote.
No bill outlawing marriage would specially target heterosexuals. It would target all married couples, regardless.

So? It still outlaws marriage for heterosexuals, homosexuals, everybody who wants to get married. It doesn't deprive one group of one thing. It deprives everyone of a specific 'right' that the resolution wishes to uphold.

That all member states are prohibited from discriminating against same-sex marriages and treating them any differently than opposite gender marriages

This isn't a matter of marriage. It's a matter of if you have marriage, then no discrimination against homosexuals. "Right to marriage" isn't a thing that's everywhere, just places where the culture adapts to that. It also means same-sex couples can be together.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:26 am**

Uan aa Boa wrote:
Imperial Siber wrote:Really? It's not even finished voting yet and your scared of people being able to marry who they want if the other person consents? Wow, homophobic much?

The majority of nations in Forest are voting against Marriage Equality because it is of too poor a standard to deserve a place in the statute books. We strongly deny that this implies homophobic attitudes on our part and dissociate ourselves from the attitudes of nations such as Uinted Communists of Africa. To avoid bigotry it is not necessary to support any and all proposals with egalitarian intent no matter how bad they are.

Uan aa Boa will support this repeal should the resolution pass, and I believe that many in our region will do likewise.

As earlier, I have proposed that if this does get repealed or not voted in, then many people would join together to edit and peer review what was written, to make grammatical errors and loop holes fade away.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:34 am**

Imperial Siber wrote:As earlier, I have proposed that if this does get repealed or not voted in, then many people would join together to edit and peer review what was written, to make grammatical errors and loop holes fade away.

And we would support and vote for that, but since existing resolutions cannot be edited this repeal will be a necessary step should the resolution pass. Indeed had the author of Marriage Equality created a drafting thread in this forum the errors would have been pointed out to them through precisely that peer review process.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:42 am**

The Slavic ambassador rises from his seat, "We will wholeheartedly support this proposal in the hopes of achieving a standard of publication."

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:19 am**

Uinted Communist of Africa wrote:
Imperial Siber wrote:

Twisted? Because I believe that natural wants shouldn't be suppressed do to age-old religious texts from 2000 years ago that were written by people who knew little-to nothing about the universe and stuff?
"And sure, you don't like our rules here? Well then move away from your home, friends, job, social life, familiar culture, and family? What? You don't want to lose everything you know and care about except for a few belongings? We'll then you can't complain about our rules from a relegion not everybody in the country follows."

1) in order to be considered a citizen you have to be part of our religion
2) don't like it ...yes leave
3)We don't care if you don't like it....follow rule 2
4)Your friends and family probably will shun you if you aren't part of the religion so why stay?
5) you cant get a job here if you don't conform
So.....

“Your nation sounds awful. Of course the law of human nature dictates that a good deal of your citizenry is as conformist as you wish wish they were. Further? ‘if you don’t like it, leave!’ is a piss-poor answer to a concern over civil liberties.”

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:23 am**

Alosa wrote:"as always the Republic is in complete disagreement with the un-european ideology of Imperium Anglorum''

“This isn’t about your ideology. This is about preventing disastrous legislation from staying in the WA. What do to have against IA!?”

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:14 am**

Willania Imperium wrote:
Alosa wrote:"as always the Republic is in complete disagreement with the un-european ideology of Imperium Anglorum''

“This isn’t about your ideology. This is about preventing disastrous legislation from staying in the WA. What do to have against IA!?”

IA, otherwise known as Mrs. Democracy Nature Retard to us, is nothing other than a backwards society trying to impose its views on others

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:40 am**

Repealing for a 3 letter mistake. Get real.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:44 am**

Keshiland wrote:Repealing for a 3 letter mistake. Get real.

OOC: Things have been repealed for less. Spell check is free. People should use it.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:45 am**

Keshiland wrote:Repealing for a 3 letter mistake. Get real.

OOC:
Not just that, if you'd actually read the repeal.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:47 am**

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Keshiland wrote:Repealing for a 3 letter mistake. Get real.

OOC: Things have been repealed for less. Spell check is free. People should use it.

Anyone who said ise was wrong can not use spelling as an excuse

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:49 am**

Keshiland wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: Things have been repealed for less. Spell check is free. People should use it.

Anyone who said ise was wrong can not use spelling as an excuse

OOC: -ise is an appropriate version unique to the parts of the world where the British had influence. Since the entire website is owned by an Australian man, I can hardly imagine that -ise would ever been seen as inappropriate. Try again, kid.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:51 am**

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Keshiland wrote:

Anyone who said ise was wrong can not use spelling as an excuse

OOC: -ise is an appropriate version unique to the parts of the world where the British had influence. Since the entire website is owned by an Australian man, I can hardly imagine that -ise would ever been seen as inappropriate. Try again, kid.

The only country that is English that does not use brittish spelling is American. Try again

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:53 am**

Keshiland wrote:Anyone who said ise was wrong can not use spelling as an excuse

Perhaps you should look a little harder, and maybe you might regognize (or regognise if you prefer) the repeated error. It has nothing to do with American vs. UK English.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:55 am**

Keshiland wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: -ise is an appropriate version unique to the parts of the world where the British had influence. Since the entire website is owned by an Australian man, I can hardly imagine that -ise would ever been seen as inappropriate. Try again, kid.

The only country that is English that does not use ~~brittish~~ British spelling is American. Try again

OOC: Both are acceptable, dude. Always have been. You can't claim that it's an incorrect spelling when it's recognized by a major branch of the language as acceptable.

Also, corrected your spelling.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:54 am**

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Keshiland wrote:Repealing for a 3 letter mistake. Get real.

OOC: Things have been repealed for less. Spell check is free. People should use it.

OOC: The spirit and values of marriage equality behind the resolution in question are of more value to me than the need to correct spelling mistakes. So no. I won’t be supporting its repeal. Doing so will only encourgae homophobic reactionary factions in the GA. The “noble” idea of repealing it in the hopes of replacing it with a better-written resolution will be for naught.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:08 pm**

Tinfect wrote:OOC:
Not just that, if you'd actually read the repeal.

OOC: Beginning to think that previous resolutions do not exist to most member nations, or that the loopholes presented in getting around this resolution making it meaningless do not exist either. The times they are a changing, better start lowering them standards.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:10 pm**

Prydania wrote:OOC: ... Doing so will only encourage homophobic reactionary factions in the GA. The “noble” idea of repealing it in the hopes of replacing it with a better-written resolution will be for naught.

With a player base as large as NationStates has, I am sure there are at least a few homophobes. However, the fact that a proposal with substantial disregard for the inadvertent loopholes in the proposal's wording, in addition to the much mentioned typos is currently winning 7,000 to 5,000 should provide sufficient evidence that as a whole, there are more NationStates players who are in favor of "Marriage Equality" than who are opposed to it. A well drafted actually peer-reviewed resolution would have no issue reaching quorum and being voted into effect. I personally would prefer that a well drafted peer-reviewed piece of legislation about this exact topic would be passed as compared to the present proposal at vote. Repeals followed by replacement happens frequently. And it may not happen next week, or two weeks, or within a month, because of voter fatigue, but I assure you that if "Marriage Equality" is repealed a better proposal will inevitably take its place.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:11 pm**

Prydania wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: Things have been repealed for less. Spell check is free. People should use it.

OOC: The spirit and values of marriage equality behind the resolution in question are of more value to me than the need to correct spelling mistakes. So no. I won’t be supporting its repeal. Doing so will only encourgae homophobic reactionary factions in the GA. The “noble” idea of repealing it in the hopes of replacing it with a better-written resolution will be for naught.

OOC: Well, how about the fact that this proposals predecessor 'Freedom of Marriage' was repealed because of the subsequent passage of CoCR made it redundant? I'd like to point out that FoM was far better crafted than this.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:45 pm**

Prydania wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: Things have been repealed for less. Spell check is free. People should use it.

OOC: The spirit and values of marriage equality behind the resolution in question are of more value to me than the need to correct spelling mistakes. So no. I won’t be supporting its repeal. Doing so will only encourgae homophobic reactionary factions in the GA. The “noble” idea of repealing it in the hopes of replacing it with a better-written resolution will be for naught.

OOC: To hell with the spirit of the law. The spirit of the law is entirely irrelevant in the GA. Throwing out drafting standards merely because it's a feel-good proposal is asinine. That thing could promise gold falling from the sky into my nation's coffers, and I'd still oppose it based on those standards.

I say it again: The spirit of the law is entirely irrelevant in the GA. The letter of the law is the only thing that has ever mattered.

Posted: **Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:59 pm**

Keshiland wrote:The only country that is English that does not use brittish spelling is American.

OOC: As a Brit, I died a little inside when I saw that not only was the word "British" tainted with a spelling error, but that it also lacked a capital letter. It added insult to injury when "American" was spelled correctly, AND with a capital letter. But regardless, on the subject of the repeal, I entirely support the repeal on the basis of the spelling error being one of the main reasons, even if it is just as a point of principle. That kind of spelling error would have easily been caught at an early stage of drafting...

NationStates

[PASSED] Repeal "Marriage Equality"