NSG Senate Coffee Shop: 50% off Americanos [NSG Senate]

[Yanalia]

Prevention of Filibustering Act
Author: Kamchastkia (SAP) | Sponsors: | SIMBEDS Category: Senate Procedures | Urgency: Utmost

---

Disgusted, at the attempts of several senators to impede the democratic process established inside Aurentina

Hereby, Repeals section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act.

Replaces the repealed section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act with the following

"4b. Senators may petition the president to move individual pieces of legislation, with 7 seconds, to its correct SIMBEDS category if the one it was assigned to by its author is inappropriate for the type of action, procedure, etc. it establishes."

Condemns, the anti-democratic behaviour of several senators in awe of their blatant disrespect for the democratic process.

I'd change it to "is in an inappropriate category for the policy area it addresses," for clarity. I'd also add a sentence to the effect of "Senators may petition the President to move up entire categories of SIMBEDS, if and only if there is a bill of high urgency and importance in a certain category."

Sponsored if you do this.

[Kamchastkia]

Prevention of Filibustering Act
Author: Kamchastkia (SAP) | Sponsors: | SIMBEDS Category: Senate Procedures | Urgency: Utmost

---

Disgusted, at the attempts of several senators to impede the democratic process established inside Aurentina

Hereby, Repeals section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act.

Replaces the repealed section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act with the following


Condemns, the anti-democratic behaviour of several senators in awe of their blatant disrespect for the democratic process.

I'd change it to "is in an inappropriate category for the policy area it addresses," for clarity. I'd also add a sentence to the effect of "Senators may petition the President to move up entire categories of SIMBEDS, if and only if there is a bill of high urgency and importance in a certain category."

Sponsored if you do this.

Editted Version

Prevention of Filibustering Act
Author: Kamchastkia (SAP) | Sponsors: | SIMBEDS Category: Senate Procedures | Urgency: Utmost

---

Disgusted, at the attempts of several senators to impede the democratic process established inside Aurentina

Hereby, Repeals section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act.

Replaces the repealed section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act with the following

"4b. Senators may petition the president to move individual pieces of legislation, with 7 seconds, to their proper SIMBEDS category if they were improperly placed by their author. Senators may also petition the President to move entire SIMBEDS individual categories to the top of the queue if there is legislation with urgency requiring such action."

Condemns, the anti-democratic behaviour of several senators in awe of their blatant disrespect for the democratic process.

[Yanalia]

But what will we do about bills placed in the wrong category by the author then?

[Kamchastkia]

But what will we do about bills placed in the wrong category by the author then?

GRRRRRR I go edit again.

[Kamchastkia]

But what will we do about bills placed in the wrong category by the author then?

Third Draft

Prevention of Filibustering Act
Author: Kamchastkia (SAP) | Sponsors: | SIMBEDS Category: Senate Procedures | Urgency: Utmost

---

Disgusted, at the attempts of several senators to impede the democratic process established inside Aurentina

Hereby, Repeals section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act.

Replaces the repealed section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act with the following

"4b. Senators may petition the president to move individual pieces of legislation, with 7 seconds, to their proper SIMBEDS category if they were improperly placed by their author. Senators may also petition the President to move entire SIMBEDS individual categories to the top of the queue if there is legislation with urgency requiring such action."

Condemns, the anti-democratic behaviour of several senators in awe of their blatant disrespect for the democratic process.

[Maklohi Vai]

The categories portion was already addressed by an earlier bill, an amendment to SIMBEDS.

[Yanalia]

Just one more thing for sponsorship? I would say "urgency and importance." Something could be urgent but trivial, and used as a pretext.

[Kamchastkia]

The categories portion was already addressed by an earlier bill, an amendment to SIMBEDS.

name/link?

[Gothmogs]

Cetacean and Great Ape Bill of Rights
Drafted by: Gothmogs, Ainin
Sponsors:
Category: Environment?

Understanding that Great Apes and Cetaceans have very complex emotional and intellectual lives, and deserve to be protected from humans and human violence. Also understanding that Orca Whales specifically have larger and more complex emotional areas in their brains, meaning they actually feel more emotion than humans. Great Apes and Cetaceans need to be left alone in peace.

All Cetaceans and Great Apes hereby shall receive the following rights:

1. Every individual cetacean and great ape has the right to life.
2. No cetacean or great ape should be held in captivity or servitude; be subject to cruel treatment; or be removed from their natural environment.
3. All cetaceans and great apes have the right to freedom of movement and residence within their natural environment.
4. No cetacean or great ape is the property of any State, corporation, human group or individual.
5. Cetaceans and great apes have the right to the protection of their natural environment.
6. Cetaceans and great apes have the right not to be subject to the disruption of their cultures.
7. The rights, freedoms and norms set forth in this Declaration should be protected under domestic law.
8. No State, corporation, human group or individual should engage in any activity that undermines these rights, freedoms and norms.
9. Nothing in this Declaration shall prevent a State from enacting stricter provisions for the protection of cetacean or great ape rights.
10. Nothing in this Declaration shall prevent the care or help given to cetaceans or great apes.
11. No cetacean or great ape will be punished by, or bound to, any human created law.
12. Knowingly depriving Cetaceans and Great Apes of the aforementioned rights is a derelict, and accidentally depriving Cetaceans and Great Apes of the aforementioned rights is a contravention.

Section 1
1. Establishes the Great Ape and Cetacean Rights Enforcement Agency (GACREA) who's duty will be determining whether or not a great ape or cetacean's rights have been violated, and to take charge of cases involving such violations.
2. The GACREA will also be responsible for determining proper living conditions for injured or disabled apes that are in the care of a qualified human or veterinary association.
3. The GACREA will report to the Ministry of the Environment.
4. Establishes a cetacean sanctuary off the coast of Woozen in Andersbai for injured or disabled cetaceans who require human care.

Acknowledgements: Thanks to Alexander Ainin for suggesting line 12 of the bill of rights.

Hereby passes the Cetacean and Great Ape Bill of Rights

Yeah, definitely a controversial topic, but I will see how this goes. Thoughts or critiques?

Reposting so it is not lost in the silliness.

[Senate President pro Tempore]

Kam: The bill is a little harsh. Instead of "improperly placed by the author", I would say "thought to be improperly placed by the author", as this is a matter of opinion. Also, just out of curiosity, does the last phrase happen to be made out to anyone in particular? Say, Ainin?

[Kamchastkia]

Kam: The bill is a little harsh. Instead of "improperly placed by the author", I would say "thought to be improperly placed by the author", as this is a matter of opinion. Also, just out of curiosity, does the last phrase happen to be made out to anyone in particular? Say, Ainin?

Not answering.

[Maklohi Vai]

The categories portion was already addressed by an earlier bill, an amendment to SIMBEDS.

name/link?

It was actually in the original SIMBEDS bill, my mistake: viewtopic.php?p=15729598#p15729598

[Brissia]

Kam: The bill is a little harsh. Instead of "improperly placed by the author", I would say "thought to be improperly placed by the author", as this is a matter of opinion. Also, just out of curiosity, does the last phrase happen to be made out to anyone in particular? Say, Ainin?

Not answering.

How can we condemn 'several senators'? If you're giving a condemnation, specify the EXACT individuals, organizations, or governments at which the condemnation is issued. No name? No condemnation.

[Yanalia]

name/link?

It was actually in the original SIMBEDS bill, my mistake: viewtopic.php?p=15729598#p15729598

This new bill still has to restate it, since SIMBEDS just references the REA.

[Maklohi Vai]

It was actually in the original SIMBEDS bill, my mistake: viewtopic.php?p=15729598#p15729598

This new bill still has to restate it, since SIMBEDS just references the REA.

Fair enough.

[Kamchastkia]

Not answering.

How can we condemn 'several senators'? If you're giving a condemnation, specify the EXACT individuals, organizations, or governments at which the condemnation is issued. No name? No condemnation.

Because if I sated specific name it would be, according to the law-- slander. I could receive a warning for it. I'd rather not.

[Wolfmanne]

Prevention of Filibustering Act
Author: Kamchastkia (SAP) | Sponsors: | SIMBEDS Category: Senate Procedures | Urgency: Utmost

---

Disgusted, at the attempts of several senators to impede the democratic process established inside Aurentina

Hereby, Repeals section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act.

Replaces the repealed section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act with the following

"4b. Senators may petition the president to move SIMBED Categories, with 7 seconds, to the "category at debate", no other category may be moved up following this for the duration of debate and voting."

Condemns, the anti-democratic behaviour of several senators in awe of their blatant disrespect for the democratic process.

Opposed, because then what do we do when a bill is in the wrong category?

[Kamchastkia]

Prevention of Filibustering Act
Author: Kamchastkia (SAP) | Sponsors: | SIMBEDS Category: Senate Procedures | Urgency: Utmost

---

Disgusted, at the attempts of several senators to impede the democratic process established inside Aurentina

Hereby, Repeals section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act.

Replaces the repealed section 4B in the First Amendment to the Republican Executive Act with the following


Condemns, the anti-democratic behaviour of several senators in awe of their blatant disrespect for the democratic process.

Opposed, because then what do we do when a bill is in the wrong category?

Read the most recent version.

[HumanSanity]

Filibustering when used sparingly is a very useful tool allowing a minority to show clear opposition to one bill.

I will vote NO. I might even filibuster it just because I can.

[Royal Black Institution]

Filibustering when used sparingly is a very useful tool allowing a minority to show clear opposition to one bill.

I will vote NO. I might even filibuster it just because I can.

I totally agree with the honourable Member, but I am certain that our perspectives are different.

[Venaleria]

Kam: The bill is a little harsh. Instead of "improperly placed by the author", I would say "thought to be improperly placed by the author", as this is a matter of opinion. Also, just out of curiosity, does the last phrase happen to be made out to anyone in particular? Say, Ainin?

Not answering.

Then at least respond to my first point....

[HumanSanity]

Motions Reform Act
Author: HumanSanity | Sponsors: none yet | SIMBEDS Category: Senate Proceedure

Preamble
Recognizing that various rules regarding motions in the Senate chamber have been instated throughout time and that, because of this, they are often inconsistent and difficult to find and apply.

On Motions
1. Any Senator may place a motion before the Senate. Any Senator may second a motion before the Senate.
1a. The necessary seconds for the enactment of a motion must be obtained within 24 hours of the motion originally being placed before the Senate. If more than 24 hours pass the motion will be considered closed.
1b. Any Senator who makes or seconds a motion withdraw their motion or second at any time before the motion is enacted.
1c. No proxy motions may be used.
1d. Once the necessary seconds have been obtained a motion will have passed and no counter-motion may be raised against it.

On Counter Motions
2. Any Senator may place a counter-motion before the Senate. Counter-motions must be in opposition to a specific motion that has not already been enacted.
2a. A counter motion mandates that the motion countered receives one more second than was previously necessary.
2b. Only 10 counter motions may be logged against a motion.
2c. Counter motions may not be done by proxy.

On Approval
3. Where approval by an official is necessary the approval of the President of Aurentina, the Vice President of Aurentina, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, or the President pro Tempore of the Senate will be sufficient.
3a. If the necessary seconds have been obtained on a motion but not approval no counter motions may be lodged.
3b. If approval is not secured within 24 hours of the original motion being made then the motion will be closed.

Reforming Motions
4. The following motions may now be made and enacted with the specified number of seconds. Any motions in Aurentine law that are addressed here are superseded. Any motions in Aurentine law that are not addressed here still stand.
4a. A motion made by a bill's author to withdraw it from the queue is enacted when seconded. This motion cannot have a counter-motion raised against it.
4b. A motion to move debate to a different SIMBEDS Category may be made and is enacted when tenthed and after having been approved.
4c. A motion to change a bill's Omnibus category will be enacted when tenthed and approved.
4d. A motion to extend debate will be enacted when tenthed and approved. Debate may not be extended by more than 24 hours.
4e. A motion to extend voting will be enacted when tenthed and approved. Voting may not be extended by more than 48 hours.
4f. A motion to end debate early may only be enacted when twelfthed and approved. Ending debate early may only occur after one half of the debate time has already elapsed.
4g. A motion to end voting early may only be enacted after 24 hours of voting have already passed and if 90%+ of the votes are currently in favor of all bills up for vote. A motion to end voting early will be enacted when tenthed and approved.
4h. A motion to count quorum on a measure will necessitate one fourth of all Senators to vote on a measure and will be enacted when fifteenthed and approved by at least two of the five listed officials.

Currently seeking lots of feedback and sponsors

Any more thoughts besides Ainin's downright refusal.

[Britanno]

Honestly Human Sanity, I'm not sure. If it came to vote and neither side persuaded me, I'd abstain. I don't know where I stand on the matter.

I'm not ignoring your bill, just not sure on where I stand.

[HumanSanity]

Honestly Human Sanity, I'm not sure. If it came to vote and neither side persuaded me, I'd abstain. I don't know where I stand on the matter.

I'm not ignoring your bill, just not sure on where I stand.

The reason I did this was to allow opposition to motions that may be controversial to be raised. This is partially in reaction to the recent filibuster except that I agree with the concept of a filibuster, unlike Kamchastika, but think it should be difficult and it should be able to be protested. I also think reserving the right queue jump to the President to approve creates an almost dictatorial power.

It also reforms, streamlines, and clarifies the motion process (i.e. part 4).

[Katepano]

I am not a big fan of it either, but it is a very important concept in Christianity.

12. No parent shall force a minor to attend religious services or participate in religious rituals against their will.

Since an infant would not communicate that it is against their will to be bathed in the water and/or oil... I don't see an issue.

I assume that the bill's objective is to protect minors from forced religious activity. Given the spirit of the law, wouldn't it require an assent in order for baptism to occur? Or at least, might not a judge reasonably interpret it this way? In that case, no infant could go to a religious service.

On another note, if a minor is presumed to have sufficient judgement on whether or not to participate in religious activity, does this mean they have sufficient judgement to vote or be held fully accountable for any crimes?