NSG Senate Chamber [NSG Senate] - Version 4

by **Lamaredia** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:01 pm

RAPA - Nay (Horribly written bill)
CSA - Aye

by **The Nihilistic view** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:09 pm

Lamaredia wrote:
Macedonian Grand Empire wrote:
By voting? No it is setting a dangerous international precedent by going this way. For instance the USA and NATO members can proceed to freeze the assets of senators of aurentina that voted Nay on joining the coalition.

Voting to invade Ukraine. Have you seen or heard nothing about the current situation in Ukraine? They approved an invasion of the Crimean peninsula, without having any legal reason to do so. They have broken international law.

International law really is a load of crap. It's only law for small nations who are bullied into following it if they decided not to follow it voluntarily. For powerful nations it can just be ignored. Secondly you can't really call it law when not everybody is signed up for the same set of rules, it's really just another level of bilateral agreements between nations that agree to sign the same thing. Anyway whether it's morally right or wrong it's legal according to Russian law. We both know International law is meaningless, to be used as justification when it suits and ignored when it does not.

by **The Nihilistic view** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:11 pm

Lamaredia wrote:
Macedonian Grand Empire wrote:They have not committed a crime by voting according to their view of the situation.

They have! International law states that you may not invade another country without an UN resolution!

"PEACE IN OUR TIME!!!!!!"

by **Britanno** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:12 pm

The Nihilistic view wrote:Education on alcoholism is the long term. Not punishing most drinkers for the actions of a few. Aside from the fact that those who abuse alcohol are going to buy or get hold of it even if it means sacrificing food, warmth or clothes for them or their family. Do you even know what addiction means? Or why people become addicts? Since believing that a higher price will stop people being alcoholics is laughable and shows zero understanding of the underlying problems that normally turn one into an alcoholic. I will give you a clue it's not "Ooooooooohhh beer is cheap, we should live off that.". It's never a conscious choice, people fall into it. Usually due to problems in their life.

Has the current exorbitant amount of tax on Fuel stopped people driving? No. Has the huge duty already on alcohol stopped people drinking? No. Does large taxes on fags stop people from smoking? No. In each case what makes the real difference is not the price but the help offered to people in the case of two of those things and education in all three. There is no substitute for education, any other method is arse about face.

We're not only had time for debate, but we've had this debate before.

We are voting, I wasn't aware that we should be debating during voting.

by **Dendart** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:17 pm

yea chemical safety act
nay RAPA

by **The Nihilistic view** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:19 pm

Britanno wrote:
The Nihilistic view wrote:Education on alcoholism is the long term. Not punishing most drinkers for the actions of a few. Aside from the fact that those who abuse alcohol are going to buy or get hold of it even if it means sacrificing food, warmth or clothes for them or their family. Do you even know what addiction means? Or why people become addicts? Since believing that a higher price will stop people being alcoholics is laughable and shows zero understanding of the underlying problems that normally turn one into an alcoholic. I will give you a clue it's not "Ooooooooohhh beer is cheap, we should live off that.". It's never a conscious choice, people fall into it. Usually due to problems in their life.

Has the current exorbitant amount of tax on Fuel stopped people driving? No. Has the huge duty already on alcohol stopped people drinking? No. Does large taxes on fags stop people from smoking? No. In each case what makes the real difference is not the price but the help offered to people in the case of two of those things and education in all three. There is no substitute for education, any other method is arse about face.

We're not only had time for debate, but we've had this debate before.

We are voting, I wasn't aware that we should be debating during voting.

Despite the million times I as PpT have said otherwise since my very first day in the job and many examples of such taking place you still wheel out that excuse. Nice to see you don't have a argument behind your vote. If you don't have an argument just say so, no need to make pitiful excuses.

by **New Waterford** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:52 pm

CSA: AYE
RAPA: NAY

by **Britanno** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:04 pm

The Nihilistic view wrote:Despite the million times I as PpT have said otherwise since my very first day in the job and many examples of such taking place you still wheel out that excuse. Nice to see you don't have a argument behind your vote. If you don't have an argument just say so, no need to make pitiful excuses.

by **Macedonian Grand Empire** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:11 pm

Lamaredia wrote:
Macedonian Grand Empire wrote:They have not committed a crime by voting according to their view of the situation.

They have! International law states that you may not invade another country without an UN resolution! Voting to send troops to a country is breaking the law, because you are acting under the pretense of breaking said law.

No they have not broken the law due to their voting. They are not criminals. They vote according to their own principles and as such they thought that the vote was right pretty much like we vote as senators. I as minister of finance will not set an international precedent into freezing the accounts of members of parliament due to some people consideration that they committed a crime by their voting.

by **Phocidaea** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:19 pm

Repeal the APA: Aye (However poorly written it may be)
CSA: Aye

Also,

Phocidaea wrote:I believe this has enough sponsors to be added (I may be wrong):
First Amendment to the 23 November Act

Urgency: Moderate | Author: Phocidaea (NDP) | Category: Law and Order
[b]Sponsors: Oneracon (RG), Resora (CP), Geilinor (NDP), Uiiop (NDP)

The Senate of Aurentina,

ACKNOWLEDGING the threat terrorism and organised crime pose to Aurentina;
APPALLED at the potential for abuse of power stemming from the following language in the 23 November Act:
With the approval of a judge of the Supreme Court of Aurentina and the Chief Prosecutor of the Commonwealth Prosecution Service, the Minister of the Interior may outlaw an organisation it deems terrorist or part of an organised crime network.

HEREBY AMENDS the act as follows:

1. The section reading:
With the approval of a judge of the Supreme Court of Aurentina and the Chief Prosecutor of the Commonwealth Prosecution Service, the Minister of the Interior may outlaw an organisation it deems terrorist or part of an organised crime network.

Shall be struck out, and replaced with the following:
The Minister of the Interior, with the approval of a judge of the Supreme Court of Aurentina and the Chief Prosecutor of the Commonwealth Prosecution Service, may call a special session of the Senate to decide by simple majority whether to outlaw an organisation as a terrorist or organised crime organisation.

by **Britanno** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:38 pm

Macedonian Grand Empire wrote:No they have not broken the law due to their voting. They are not criminals. They vote according to their own principles and as such they thought that the vote was right pretty much like we vote as senators. I as minister of finance will not set an international precedent into freezing the accounts of members of parliament due to some people consideration that they committed a crime by their voting.

So if the Aurentine senate votes to commit genocide, it's legal?

by **The Nihilistic view** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:40 pm

by **The Nihilistic view** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:41 pm

Britanno wrote:
Macedonian Grand Empire wrote:No they have not broken the law due to their voting. They are not criminals. They vote according to their own principles and as such they thought that the vote was right pretty much like we vote as senators. I as minister of finance will not set an international precedent into freezing the accounts of members of parliament due to some people consideration that they committed a crime by their voting.

So if the Aurentine senate votes to commit genocide, it's legal?

We would have to de-criminalise murder first, or in fact any crime against the person. As well as the Genocide law (Forget it's exact name).

by **Geilinor** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:07 pm

RAPA -Abstain
CSA - Aye

by **Haelunor** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:09 pm

RAPA -Nay
CSA - Aye

by **The State of Czecho-Slovakia** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:26 pm

- Chemical Safety Act: Aye
- Repeal the Alcohol Pricing Act: Nay

by **Unicario** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:38 pm

RAPA - Nay
CSA - Aye

by **New Zepuha** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:50 pm

RPPA - Nay
CSA - Aye

by **Soviet Canuckistan** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 5:24 pm

CSA: AYE
RAPA: NAY

by **The Gallant Old Republic** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 5:38 pm

Aye on both.

by **Grand Longueville** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 5:47 pm

RAPA: AYE
CSA: AYE

by **Costa Fierro** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:14 pm

Aye to both bills.

by **Mediciano** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:26 pm

Aye to both bills.

by **New Zepuha** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:31 pm

New Zepuha wrote:RPPA - Nay
CSA - Aye

Changed to Aye on both. Forget to try to repeal the repressive tax.

by **Oneracon** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:35 pm

RAPA - Abstain
CSA - Aye

Pro:	LGBTQ+ rights, basic income, secularism, gun control, internet freedom, civic nationalism, non-military national service, independent Scotland, antifa
Anti:	Social conservatism, laissez-faire capitalism, NuAtheism, PETA, capital punishment, Putin, SWERF, TERF, GamerGate, "Alt-right" & neo-Nazism, Drumpf, ethnic nationalism, "anti-PC", pineapple on pizza

NSG Senate Chamber [NSG Senate] - Version 4

Who is online