The National Liberal Party HQ [NSG Senate]

[Seitonjin]

Is there anything, you would like to discuss?

Are we a big tent liberal party?

[Battlion]

I did just think of something, it's obscure but it's important I believe.

Baby names! There is no time limit on when a name must be given and what names are acceptable...

Now I propose we go with something like the UK and be very liberal on names but include a clause stating that officials do not have to sign a birth certificate if a name is deemed to be "offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear or threat". However to protect religious freedoms I suggest an additional clause be put in to state that names of religious significance do not come under offensive?

This is completely inspired by this case.

[Battlion]

Is there anything, you would like to discuss?

Are we a big tent liberal party?

We seem to be turning into one

[Seitonjin]

I am not amused with analyzing these thingies for education policy *dies*

*respawns*

Chocolate chip cookie first. Nom nom nom.

[Battlion]

I did just think of something, it's obscure but it's important I believe.

Baby names! There is no time limit on when a name must be given and what names are acceptable...

Now I propose we go with something like the UK and be very liberal on names but include a clause stating that officials do not have to sign a birth certificate if a name is deemed to be "offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear or threat". However to protect religious freedoms I suggest an additional clause be put in to state that names of religious significance do not come under offensive?

This is completely inspired by this case.

[The Nihilistic view]

I did just think of something, it's obscure but it's important I believe.

Baby names! There is no time limit on when a name must be given and what names are acceptable...

Now I propose we go with something like the UK and be very liberal on names but include a clause stating that officials do not have to sign a birth certificate if a name is deemed to be "offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear or threat". However to protect religious freedoms I suggest an additional clause be put in to state that names of religious significance do not come under offensive?

This is completely inspired by this case.

I think the only legal name should be Boris.

[Battlion]

I did just think of something, it's obscure but it's important I believe.

Baby names! There is no time limit on when a name must be given and what names are acceptable...

Now I propose we go with something like the UK and be very liberal on names but include a clause stating that officials do not have to sign a birth certificate if a name is deemed to be "offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear or threat". However to protect religious freedoms I suggest an additional clause be put in to state that names of religious significance do not come under offensive?

This is completely inspired by this case.

I think the only legal name should be Boris.

Not at all

Did you see my post earlier regarding the citizens dividend?

[Seitonjin]

Are we a big tent liberal party?

We seem to be turning into one

We seem to be turning into the Capitalist version of the Red-Greens

Oh well :3

Speaking of which, is there any policies that seem off tune with current party platform to be retweaked?

[Battlion]

We seem to be turning into one

We seem to be turning into the Capitalist version of the Red-Greens

Oh well :3

Speaking of which, is there any policies that seem off tune with current party platform to be retweaked?

Looking at them, not at all as far as I can see

[Seitonjin]

I did just think of something, it's obscure but it's important I believe.

Baby names! There is no time limit on when a name must be given and what names are acceptable...

Now I propose we go with something like the UK and be very liberal on names but include a clause stating that officials do not have to sign a birth certificate if a name is deemed to be "offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear or threat". However to protect religious freedoms I suggest an additional clause be put in to state that names of religious significance do not come under offensive?

This is completely inspired by this case.

The naming policies seem out of question for this party. Unless we want to factor P-Correctness.

[Battlion]

I did just think of something, it's obscure but it's important I believe.

Baby names! There is no time limit on when a name must be given and what names are acceptable...

Now I propose we go with something like the UK and be very liberal on names but include a clause stating that officials do not have to sign a birth certificate if a name is deemed to be "offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear or threat". However to protect religious freedoms I suggest an additional clause be put in to state that names of religious significance do not come under offensive?

This is completely inspired by this case.

The naming policies seem out of question for this party. Unless we want to factor P-Correctness.

What do you mean by this out of interest?

The bill that I'm thinking of that shouldn't be a partisan thing, merely common sense

[Seitonjin]

The naming policies seem out of question for this party. Unless we want to factor P-Correctness.

What do you mean by this out of interest?

The bill that I'm thinking of that shouldn't be a partisan thing, merely common sense

It neither effects religious or personal liberties from being ridiculed. You can't change a cultural mindset with a bill, only tone it down.

Even if common sense, it's quite moot.

[Battlion]

What do you mean by this out of interest?

The bill that I'm thinking of that shouldn't be a partisan thing, merely common sense

It neither effects religious or personal liberties from being ridicule. You can't change a cultural mindset with a bill, only tone it down.

The idea really is we prevent children from having to live with names that are honestly awful but not banning names like some countries.

It's more of a common sense thing really, merely the official refuses to sign any birth certificate with a name that is offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear of violence. It won't affect many cases but it's just something I think needs to be there alongside a time limit for giving name for children, you don't want children going around being called "child #1" or "boy/girl" because parents aren't obliged to.

It's minor legislation, just something I think we should do

[Seitonjin]

It neither effects religious or personal liberties from being ridicule. You can't change a cultural mindset with a bill, only tone it down.

The idea really is we prevent children from having to live with names that are honestly awful but not banning names like some countries.

It's more of a common sense thing really, merely the official refuses to sign any birth certificate with a name that is offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear of violence. It won't affect many cases but it's just something I think needs to be there alongside a time limit for giving name for children, you don't want children going around being called "child #1" or "boy/girl" because parents aren't obliged to.

It's minor legislation, just something I think we should do

Ah. Makes more sense then.

Before that, is there a certain naming order for Aurentina? This is important to consider.

[Battlion]

The idea really is we prevent children from having to live with names that are honestly awful but not banning names like some countries.

It's more of a common sense thing really, merely the official refuses to sign any birth certificate with a name that is offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear of violence. It won't affect many cases but it's just something I think needs to be there alongside a time limit for giving name for children, you don't want children going around being called "child #1" or "boy/girl" because parents aren't obliged to.

It's minor legislation, just something I think we should do

Ah. Makes more sense then.

Before that, is there a certain naming order for Aurentina? This is important to consider.

A certain naming order?

[Seitonjin]

Ah. Makes more sense then.

Before that, is there a certain naming order for Aurentina? This is important to consider.

A certain naming order?

Like family name first, given name first, those things.

I can't remember the terminology atm.

[Battlion]

A certain naming order?

Like family name first, given name first, those things.

I can't remember the terminology atm.

Oh no I doubt it, I thought we just went along with first name, middle name and family name lol

[Seitonjin]

Like family name first, given name first, those things.

I can't remember the terminology atm.

Oh no I doubt it, I thought we just went along with first name, middle name and family name lol

So that bill should be easy to work out then.

[Battlion]

Oh no I doubt it, I thought we just went along with first name, middle name and family name lol

So that bill should be easy to work out then.

Definitely, unless we want to determine that too but I think it's rather unrequired as the official could decline the name of a child for all the above reasons.

[Seitonjin]

I need some sleep. Night~!

[Lamaredia]

I did just think of something, it's obscure but it's important I believe.

Baby names! There is no time limit on when a name must be given and what names are acceptable...

Now I propose we go with something like the UK and be very liberal on names but include a clause stating that officials do not have to sign a birth certificate if a name is deemed to be "offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear or threat". However to protect religious freedoms I suggest an additional clause be put in to state that names of religious significance do not come under offensive?

This is completely inspired by this case.

When I look at the US now-a-days all i can think of is ''Separation of Church and State my ass''

[Battlion]

I did just think of something, it's obscure but it's important I believe.

Baby names! There is no time limit on when a name must be given and what names are acceptable...

Now I propose we go with something like the UK and be very liberal on names but include a clause stating that officials do not have to sign a birth certificate if a name is deemed to be "offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear or threat". However to protect religious freedoms I suggest an additional clause be put in to state that names of religious significance do not come under offensive?

This is completely inspired by this case.

When I look at the US now-a-days all i can think of is ''Separation of Church and State my ass''

It's worrying to say the least, we must ensure this can never happen in Aurentina.

[The Nihilistic view]

I think the only legal name should be Boris.

Not at all

Did you see my post earlier regarding the citizens dividend?

No i din't actually, is it over the page?

[The Nihilistic view]

It neither effects religious or personal liberties from being ridicule. You can't change a cultural mindset with a bill, only tone it down.

The idea really is we prevent children from having to live with names that are honestly awful but not banning names like some countries.

It's more of a common sense thing really, merely the official refuses to sign any birth certificate with a name that is offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear of violence. It won't affect many cases but it's just something I think needs to be there alongside a time limit for giving name for children, you don't want children going around being called "child #1" or "boy/girl" because parents aren't obliged to.

It's minor legislation, just something I think we should do

Names such as North West spring to mind.

[Battlion]

The idea really is we prevent children from having to live with names that are honestly awful but not banning names like some countries.

It's more of a common sense thing really, merely the official refuses to sign any birth certificate with a name that is offensive, derogatory to the child and infringes on the right to live without fear of violence. It won't affect many cases but it's just something I think needs to be there alongside a time limit for giving name for children, you don't want children going around being called "child #1" or "boy/girl" because parents aren't obliged to.

It's minor legislation, just something I think we should do

Names such as North West spring to mind.

Yeh... I'm more thinking about the kids that have been called Superman, Vagina etc

And there have been some X_X