NSG Senate Chamber: I came, I saw, I cleaned up after myself

My Fanfics · by **Osea 767** » Mon May 11, 2015 5:01 am

Standing Order 1: Nay
Standing Order 2: Nay
Standing Order 3: Aye
Standing Order 4: Aye
Standing Order 5: Aye

First Amendment to Right to Choose Act (Amended): Aye
The Unemployment Assistance Act: Nay
First Amendment to the National Judiciary Act: Aye
Fourth Amendment to the Government Establishment Act: Aye
Amendment to the government establishment act: Aye

by **New Zepuha** » Mon May 11, 2015 7:27 am

Standing Order 1: Aye
Standing Order 2: Abstain
Standing Order 3: Aye
Standing Order 4: Aye
Standing Order 5: Nay

First Amendment to Right to Choose Act (Amended): Nay
The Unemployment Assistance Act: Aye
First Amendment to the National Judiciary Act: Aye
Fourth Amendment to the Government Establishment Act: Nay
Amendment to the government establishment act: Nay

by **Arkolon** » Mon May 11, 2015 10:27 am

Standing Orders: AYE to all
First Amendment to Right to Choose Act (Amended): NAY
The Unemployment Assistance Act: NAY
First Amendment to the National Judiciary Act: AYE
Fourth Amendment to the Government Establishment Act: NAY
Amendment to the government establishment act: AYE

by **Planita** » Mon May 11, 2015 11:41 am

I change all my votes on the standing orders to AYE

by **The Saint James Islands** » Mon May 11, 2015 11:57 am

Standing Orders: NO to 3 and 4 for ridiculously archaic and obtuse terminology; AYE to all others
First Amendment to Right to Choose Act (Amended): AYE
The Unemployment Assistance Act: NO
First Amendment to the National Judiciary Act: Abstain
Fourth Amendment to the Government Establishment Act: Abstain
Amendment to the government establishment act: AYE

by **Zurkerx** » Mon May 11, 2015 1:12 pm

ORDER.

"Voting on the bills and standing orders will now cease. I will have a tally shortly. Begin the debate on the Smoking and Tobacco Use Reduction Act".

Smoking and Tobacco Use Reduction Act

OOC: Give me some time here, it will take me a bit.

Edit: I will have it later tonight. I have to go somewhere.

by **Atlanticatia** » Mon May 11, 2015 1:15 pm

"I think that this bill will do wonders for public health and well-being, and will ensure people live healthier lives and children are protected from secondhand smoke."

by **The Liberated Territories** » Mon May 11, 2015 2:35 pm

Hell no. Your body, your choice.

Also, your business, your choice to advertise (so long as it doesn't utilize fraud).

by **MERIZoC** » Mon May 11, 2015 2:49 pm

The Liberated Territories wrote:Hell no. Your body, your choice.

"Which is why you voted nay to the First Amendment to Right to Choose Act."

by **New Zepuha** » Mon May 11, 2015 2:56 pm

The Liberated Territories wrote:Hell no. Your body, your choice.

Also, your business, your choice to advertise (so long as it doesn't utilize fraud).

Hear hear!

by **MERIZoC** » Mon May 11, 2015 2:59 pm

New Zepuha wrote:
The Liberated Territories wrote:Hell no. Your body, your choice.

Also, your business, your choice to advertise (so long as it doesn't utilize fraud).

Hear hear!

"And you, Ms. deGroot. The level of hypocrisy on the right is obscene, though not surprising. It's likely that very few of you can be held to actually consistent standards."

by **MERIZoC** » Mon May 11, 2015 3:02 pm

"I should like to point out that this part of the bill does not go far enough, in my opinion."

[smoking is prohibited]
"Inside a vehicle when a child aged 12 or under is in the vehicle."

"I would like to see this amended to "under the age of majority"."

OOC: Can that be done now, or must we wait?

by **Collatis** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:33 pm

Merizoc wrote:"I should like to point out that this part of the bill does not go far enough, in my opinion."

[smoking is prohibited]
"Inside a vehicle when a child aged 12 or under is in the vehicle."

"I would like to see this amended to "under the age of majority"."

OOC: Can that be done now, or must we wait?

"I would support such an amendment."

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:37 pm

"Firmly against. Smoking is a personal choice and regulation regarding public usage should be minimal."

by **Collatis** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:41 pm

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:"Firmly against. Smoking is a personal choice and regulation regarding public usage should be minimal."

"It stops being a personal choice when you choose to force your deadly habit on the rest of the world."

by **MERIZoC** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:42 pm

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:"Firmly against. Smoking is a personal choice and regulation regarding public usage should be minimal."

Not when public safety is concerned.

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:44 pm

Merizoc wrote:Not when public safety is concerned.

Collatis wrote:"It stops being a personal choice when you choose to force your deadly habit on the rest of the world."

"Walking by someone on a bench smoking won't give you cancer, though I can understand the law concerning inside a car containing children."

by **Ainin** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:44 pm

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:"Firmly against. Smoking is a personal choice and regulation regarding public usage should be minimal."

"It's not a personal choice when it gives others cancer."

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:44 pm

Ainin wrote:"It's not a personal choice when it gives others cancer."

"No one gets cancer walking by a smoker on their way to work every day, sir."

by **Collatis** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:45 pm

Ainin wrote:"It's not a personal choice when it gives others cancer."

"Hear, hear!"

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:46 pm

Collatis wrote:"Hear, hear!"

"Good thing it isn't."

by **The Liberated Territories** » Mon May 11, 2015 4:48 pm

*Puffs smoke into Collatis*

Got cancer yet, pal?

by **New Zepuha** » Mon May 11, 2015 5:01 pm

Merizoc wrote:
New Zepuha wrote:Hear hear!

"And you, Ms. deGroot. The level of hypocrisy on the right is obscene, though not surprising. It's likely that very few of you can be held to actually consistent standards."

"Point of order, the honorable member is calling into question my character with baseless accusations." she calmly pointed out. "I also find the fear mongering from the other side of the aisle quite disturbing, but fitting with the usual pattern."

by **Ikania** » Mon May 11, 2015 5:03 pm

"It's a bit strict and I'd prefer for it to be loosened a bit, but as it stands there are many provisions in this act that are necessary, so I'll support it."

New Zepuha wrote:
Merizoc wrote:"And you, Ms. deGroot. The level of hypocrisy on the right is obscene, though not surprising. It's likely that very few of you can be held to actually consistent standards."

"Point of order, the honorable member is calling into question my character with baseless accusations." she calmly pointed out. "I also find the fear mongering from the other side of the aisle quite disturbing, but fitting with the usual pattern."

"If I'm not mistaken, the standing orders aren't in effect until the Speaker says so. So I can say fuck off, and if I'm wrong I will certainly withdraw that comment."

by **MERIZoC** » Mon May 11, 2015 5:10 pm

New Zepuha wrote:
Merizoc wrote:"And you, Ms. deGroot. The level of hypocrisy on the right is obscene, though not surprising. It's likely that very few of you can be held to actually consistent standards."

"Point of order, the honorable member is calling into question my character with baseless accusations." she calmly pointed out. "I also find the fear mongering from the other side of the aisle quite disturbing, but fitting with the usual pattern."

Baseless? I'm pointing out blatant hypocrisy.

NSG Senate Chamber: I came, I saw, I cleaned up after myself

Who is online