by Greater Sanctum » Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:31 pm
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by Greater Sanctum » Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 am
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by Greater Sanctum » Fri Jan 01, 2010 12:52 am
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by Enn » Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:06 am
Greater Sanctum wrote:Last bump before submission.
by William Bettingham » Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:24 am
by Greater Sanctum » Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:37 am
William Bettingham wrote:Well, I see no problem with this. I am the Vice Delegate in the New Britannian Empire, a region, and we shall support this as a region.
Enn wrote:OOC: I know you posted this over on the IDU forum as well, which I haven't had a chance to properly look at. I'd suggest waiting on a few days at least, so more people can have a look over it - It's New Year's Day, lots of people may well be still celebrating/getting over the celebrations of last night.
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by A mean old man » Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:02 pm
by Greater Sanctum » Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:05 am
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by Benedict of Nursia » Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:10 am
by Reseda Island » Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:29 am
by Lelouche » Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:38 am
Recognising every child’s right to live in a carefree and loving environment for the comfort and safety of his or herself.
by Slaytesics » Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:41 am
Timurid Empire wrote:I do not understand people like this. How can you fear any human being or interaction with them? We are all Human, and we all bleed the same. Unless their a Hemophiliac.
Ranbo wrote:Heey! I'm not perv!
You name it, you claim it. You were the one that thought of it in the first place. :p
by Charlotte Ryberg » Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:56 pm
by Greater Sanctum » Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:39 pm
Lelouche wrote:Recognising every child’s right to live in a carefree and loving environment for the comfort and safety of his or herself.
We don't
We only recognize the child's right to prepared for life as an adult, and to not be unduly abused, although discipline is considered a must.
other than that, this proposal is entirely reasonable.
a) A child is entitled to be cared for, to be given sustenance, shelter, clothing, not to be deprived of education, to receive adequate medical care, and not to be physically or emotionally abused
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:Shouldn't this draft be categorised as social justice, mild?
I cannot say that this draft is ready to be submitted just yet: importantly, you will need to ensure that the clauses do not duplicate those as provided by the Child Protection Act. For example, it already illegal to sexually abuse a child and that includes foster parents.
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by Benedict of Nursia » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:01 am
by Greater Sanctum » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:45 am
When the adoption concerns an infant or small child not yet at an age of understanding, only the express written consent of the child's parents is needed to begin the proceedings.
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by Enn » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:55 am
Greater Sanctum wrote:UPDATED
Adressed the issues with first "Recognising" and clause 1 of the terms under "Declaring. Also added a section onto clause 6 of the terms:When the adoption concerns an infant or small child not yet at an age of understanding, only the express written consent of the child's parents is needed to begin the proceedings.
Also, quick question: when submitting the proposal, should I keep the codes for underlining and boldface or should I just caps the words such as "Recognizing", "Declaring" etc?
by Grays Harbor » Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:26 am
Enn wrote:Greater Sanctum wrote:UPDATED
Adressed the issues with first "Recognising" and clause 1 of the terms under "Declaring. Also added a section onto clause 6 of the terms:When the adoption concerns an infant or small child not yet at an age of understanding, only the express written consent of the child's parents is needed to begin the proceedings.
And when said child is an orphan?Also, quick question: when submitting the proposal, should I keep the codes for underlining and boldface or should I just caps the words such as "Recognizing", "Declaring" etc?
Having them in all caps is commonly seen. We're old-fashioned here at the GA, no need to frighten the oldies by using bbcode :P
by Benedict of Nursia » Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:26 am
Enn wrote:Having them in all caps is commonly seen. We're old-fashioned here at the GA, no need to frighten the oldies by using bbcode
by Greater Sanctum » Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:53 am
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by Greater Sanctum » Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:30 pm
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by Greater Sanctum » Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:12 am
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
by Bears Armed » Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:38 am
Greater Sanctum wrote:(5) Member States shall ensure that all mature aged parties involved are mentally competent to proceed with the adoption.
by Benedict of Nursia » Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:23 pm
Bears Armed wrote:Greater Sanctum wrote:(5) Member States shall ensure that all mature aged parties involved are mentally competent to proceed with the adoption.
The term "mature aged parties" seems a rather unusual contruction. Why not just "adults"?
Incidentally, what if the parent who is giving the child up for adoption is themselves 'under-age' by their nation's laws? Would the consent of their parents or legal guardians be required?
by Greater Sanctum » Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:43 am
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."
Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Simone Republic
Advertisement