Equal Marriage Act (Re-Submitted)

[Republic of Keshiland]

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant | Proposed by: Republic of Keshiland

Definitions of marriage
I. A union between 2 consenting adults bound by the state.
II. A union between 2 consenting adults bound by a religious institution.
III. A union between 3 or more consenting adults bound by the state.
IV. A union between 3 or more consenting adults bound by a religious institution.
V. A union between a sapient and sentient being bound by the state.
VI. A union between a sapient and sentient being bound by a religious institution.

Protected classes by which legal marriage by the state cannot be denied
Creed, Race, Gender, Sex, Sexual orientation, Nation of origin, Religion or Sapient species.

Mandate
All WA nations are required to allow the religious institutions the right to marry their followers by one or more choices of II, IV or VI. The choice is up to the state

National choice
It is up to each nation in the WA to choose between legally adopting zero, one, two or three of I, III, or V.

[Grays Harbor]

Why only two. This ain’t the US.

[The Greater Siriusian Domain]

Mandates All nations in the WA legally use this definition of marriage in their laws.

Teran Saber: "Which would require us to recognize marriage as a legal status to begin with. No support on principle."

[The New California Republic]

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant | Proposed by: Republic of Keshiland

Defines- Marriage as a legally binding union between 2 consenting adults, of any creed, race, gender, sex, sexual orientation, nation of origin, religion or sapient species.

Mandates All nations in the WA legally use this definition of marriage in their laws.

Prohibits Denying a marriage contract.

Allows Religious institutions to use their own definition of marriage as long as it does not involve the marriage of anyone under the age of majority.

Allows Religious institutions to refuse marriage to anyone if it violates their religious beliefs.

Makes clear Religious institutions are not courtrooms and as such are not held to the same standards as the government.

IC: Nope.

OOC: Nope. This isn't any better than the previous attempts at this sort of thing.

[Northeast American Federation]

"I simply cannot let this draft slip by without mentioning this."

Defines- Marriage as a legally binding union between 2 consenting adults, of any creed, race, gender, sex, sexual orientation, nation of origin, religion or sapient species.

"You'll excuse me for saying so, but to my knowledge there is but one sapient species on this planet. To that end, that classification being on your list of protected classes does not even make sense. Are we redefining the definition of sapience such that it permits people to marry animals, or have we made contact with intelligent extraterrestrial life forms? I find the latter unlikely and the former disgusting."

[The United Artherian Federation]

"I simply cannot let this draft slip by without mentioning this."

Defines- Marriage as a legally binding union between 2 consenting adults, of any creed, race, gender, sex, sexual orientation, nation of origin, religion or sapient species.

"You'll excuse me for saying so, but to my knowledge there is but one sapient species on this planet. To that end, that classification being on your list of protected classes does not even make sense. Are we redefining the definition of sapience such that it permits people to marry animals, or have we made contact with intelligent extraterrestrial life forms? I find the latter unlikely and the former disgusting."

OOC: He has to add this because there are all types of species in the WA.

[The New California Republic]

"I simply cannot let this draft slip by without mentioning this."



"You'll excuse me for saying so, but to my knowledge there is but one sapient species on this planet. To that end, that classification being on your list of protected classes does not even make sense. Are we redefining the definition of sapience such that it permits people to marry animals, or have we made contact with intelligent extraterrestrial life forms? I find the latter unlikely and the former disgusting."

OOC: He has to add this because there are all types of species in the WA.

OOC: Exactly correct. One of the members of the GA Secretariat is populated by a race of sentient Ursidae, so you cannot assume that the marriages will involve human beings. You also cannot assume that Nationstates takes place on Earth, it doesn't say anywhere that it does.

[Republic of Keshiland]

Why only two. This ain’t the US.

Because it is less complicated then polygamy. Plus this is only at the state level. The religions are free to do as they please as long as it does not involve minors and adults getting married.

[The New California Republic]

Why only two. This ain’t the US.

The religions are free to do as they please as long as it does not involve minors and adults getting married.

OOC: Why? Why is there an arbitrary two-tier system at play here?

[Republic of Keshiland]

The religions are free to do as they please as long as it does not involve minors and adults getting married.

OOC: Why? Why is there an arbitrary two-tier system at play here?

OOC because the state/government deals with the legality of marriage and all the perks and or advantages that come with marriage. The religious institutions deal with the moral or sacred side of marriage thus a couple could get a marriage in their religion and not the state if they want to get a type that is not allowed by legal law.

[The New California Republic]

thus a couple could get a marriage in their religion and not the state if they want to get a type that is not allowed by legal law.

OOC: Such as...? What type of marriage would not be allowed by "legal law"? Surely that would mean it is illegal then?

[Republic of Keshiland]

thus a couple could get a marriage in their religion and not the state if they want to get a type that is not allowed by legal law.

OOC: Such as...? What type of marriage would not be allowed by "legal law"? Surely that would mean it is illegal then?

Marriage with more than 2 beings. Not if they don't get it through the state. Like cohabitation was still allowed in the US before interrace or same sex was legalised

[Drittes Grossdeutsches Reich]

Ha, anotha' one

[Allied Sapients]

Ambassador Olsh rises to her full height, only able to do so because of the high ceiling in the room. "Why are you obsessed with only allowing two to be married? Northerners routinely cohabit with a large number of fellows. The Ten-Tasharn Confederacy routinely practices harem marriage, generally of mixed species. There's a human colony in Alpha Centauri where line marriage is the norm. None are suffering from what you consider "complexity.""

[The New California Republic]

OOC: Such as...? What type of marriage would not be allowed by "legal law"? Surely that would mean it is illegal then?

Marriage with more than 2 beings. Not if they don't get it through the state. Like cohabitation was still allowed in the US before interrace or same sex was legalised

OOC: That wouldn't be allowed according to your definition of marriage:

Defines- Marriage as a legally binding union between 2 consenting adults, of any creed, race, gender, sex, sexual orientation, nation of origin, religion or sapient species.

[Republic of Keshiland]

Ambassador Olsh rises to her full height, only able to do so because of the high ceiling in the room. "Why are you obsessed with only allowing two to be married? Northerners routinely cohabit with a large number of fellows. The Ten-Tasharn Confederacy routinely practices harem marriage, generally of mixed species. There's a human colony in Alpha Centauri where line marriage is the norm. None are suffering from what you consider "complexity.""

It's not outlawed it's simply not protected

[Allied Sapients]

"By defining marriage explicitly to be between two people and mandating that all WA nations use that definition, you are outlawing marriage between more than that number."

[Fauxia]

Mandates All nations in the WA legally use this definition of marriage in their laws.

Teran Saber: "Which would require us to recognize marriage as a legal status to begin with. No support on principle."

“Congratulations, ambassador, you are a voice of reason on the subject.”

[States of Glory WA Office]

Teran Saber: "Which would require us to recognize marriage as a legal status to begin with. No support on principle."

“Congratulations, ambassador, you are a voice of reason on the subject.”

Neville: Anyone who opposes Keshiland's proposals is a voice of reason.

[Grays Harbor]

Considering your answer to my simple question was gibberish and doublespeak, We cannot in good conscience support this nonsense.

[Republic of Keshiland]

Considering your answer to my simple question was gibberish and doublespeak, We cannot in good conscience support this nonsense.

If it is that important to you, you can get the religious institutions to marry groups.

[Grays Harbor]

Considering your answer to my simple question was gibberish and doublespeak, We cannot in good conscience support this nonsense.

If it is that important to you, you can get the religious institutions to marry groups.

Or you could stop with the one size fits nobody definitions.

[Allied Sapients]

OOC: Why is it so important to YOU to restrict it to two people? Answer Grays' question.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Opposed.

[Deropia]

Considering your answer to my simple question was gibberish and doublespeak, We cannot in good conscience support this nonsense.

If it is that important to you, you can get the religious institutions to marry groups.

"Yes, but without state recognition, benefits provided to married persons could be denied to some or all members of a multi-spousal marriage. Opposed."