[REPLACEMENT]Privatized Marriage Convention

[Tzorsland]

Since so many people are having so much fun writing up a Marriage resolution replacement I figured I would throw my own idea in. I've put the central theme out in the front and replaced "civil" with a more libertarian "private."

The Privatized Marriage Convention
Category: Human Rights | Strength: Mild

WHEREAS: “Marriage” began as a cultural institution for the regulation and promotion of the perpetuation and propagation of the species by creating stable cultural structures necessary for the proper development of young members of the species;

UNDERSTANDING THAT: Over time religious and social norms and customs were placed upon that cultural institution by various religious authorities;

FURTHER UNDERSTANDING THAT: In order to properly regulate complex “inheritance” rights, civil laws and regulations were placed upon the cultural institution;

REGRETTING: The fact that in order to promote notions of inequality and in some cases genetic apartheid, governments established complex license systems moving this institution clearly into the area of contract law;

DEFINING: The term “Marriage” for purposes of this resolution as the union of two people, naturally able to, through their own interactions, procreate their species;

DEFINING: The term “Private Marriage” as the legal contract of two or more people whereby the two or more people are “incorporated” into a single legal entity pursuant to law;

THE MEMBERS OF THE WORLD ASSEMBLY:

DECLARES: That marriage is a cultural institution subject to the regulations of the religions of the members entering that cultural institution;

ALLOWS: The state to encourage and discourage marriage only in matters of controlling its own population growth;

DECLARES: That private marriage is a contract subject to all the standard contract law of nations and all such regulations on contract law by the World Assembly.

Witty Title Goes Here
Category: Human Rights | Strength: Mild

WHEREAS: “Marriage” began as a cultural institution for the regulation and promotion of the perpetuation and propagation of the species by creating stable cultural structures necessary for the proper development of young members of the species;

UNDERSTANDING THAT: Over time religious and social norms and customs were placed upon that cultural institution by various religious authorities;

FURTHER UNDERSTANDING THAT: In order to properly regulate complex “inheritance” rights, civil laws and regulations were placed upon the cultural institution;

REGRETTING: The fact that in order to promote notions of inequality and in some cases genetic apartheid, governments established complex license systems moving this institution clearly into the area of contract law;

DEFINING: The term “Marriage” for purposes of this resolution as the union of two people, naturally able to, through their own interactions, procreate their species;

DEFINING: The term “Civil Marriage” as the legal contract of two or more people whereby the two or more people are “incorporated” into a single legal entity pursuant to law;

THE MEMBERS OF THE WORLD ASSEMBLY:

DECLARES: That marriage is a cultural institution subject to the regulations of the religions of the members entering that cultural institution;

ALLOWS: The state to regulate marriage only in matters of controlling its own population growth and for the safety and wellbeing of dependent children;

DECLARES: That civil marriage is a contract subject to all the standard contract law of nations and all such regulations on contract law by the World Assembly.

[Fauxia]

“Against because of the ‘allows’ clause. It condones population control.”

[Essu Beti]

"We will not be fertility testing our people as a prerequisite of marriage. Not our men, not our women, not our samarim," announces Iksana. "Not when the entire purpose this proposal seems to serve is to turn the perfectly ordinary word "marriage" into a clunky phrase "civil marriage." I really don't see our president, should they ever find someone suitable, saying "Oh wonderous dearheart of mine, would you like to get civil married?"

[Tzorsland]

So seeing that there is absolutely ZERO interest in this particular idea, I will, in the light of the complete failure of the current proposal, bump this thread and consider a suitable puppet to introduce it to the World Assembly.

(Gets a plethora of excuses from all the Tzorsland Puppet Federation Nations)

Hmmm, I may just have to join the WA myself then.

[Essu Beti]

"Are you gonna answer my concerns or not?" asks Iksana. "You know, that you'd have to have someone fertility tested to get them married, because it would forbid marriage if one of the members is sterile. If a married couple gets old and is no longer fertile, are they no longer married?"

[Tzorsland]

Oh, you had concerns? Sorry, I thought you were suffering from a failure to read the resolution.

Seriously, look at the operative clauses: fertility isn't mentioned there. It's in the preposition and only then in a historical context:"WHEREAS: “Marriage” began as a cultural institution ..."

The operative clauses state: "marriage" is a cultural institution; "civil marriage" is a part of contract law.

The allows clause allows flexibility in a number of fun daily issues that are in the system. Honestly, I can throw it out completely if necessary but then there are two "declares' in a row and that's a minor faux pas.

[Essu Beti]

"It defines marriage as "the union of two people, naturally able to, through their own interactions, procreate their species." Naturally able to procreate their species. Procreate. Capable of procreation. You have read your own proposal, yes?"

[Araraukar]

ALLOWS: The state to regulate marriage only in matters of controlling its own population growth and for the safety and wellbeing of dependent children;

Johan's eyebrows go up in surprise. "This is actually exactly what Araraukar does; a marriage licence does not equal parenting licence, and the wellbeing of children is ensured by strict regulation of who is allowed to breed and how often."

OOC: No, Araraukar doesn't do actual eugenics, it regulates population size, and tries to make sure every child is wanted and planned and that the parents are able to provide them a happy and safe childhood. And yes, Johan may be misunderstanding the proposal contents, but it doesn't look like Tzor is exactly serious with this anyway.

[Dragonslinding WA Mission]

DEFINING: The term “Marriage” for purposes of this resolution as the union of two people, naturally able to, through their own interactions, procreate their species;

Ser Dawrin Stone rose: "This definitions clause completely obliterates gay marriage and as such will likely have no chance of success."

[Tzorsland]

"It defines marriage as "the union of two people, naturally able to, through their own interactions, procreate their species." Naturally able to procreate their species. Procreate. Capable of procreation. You have read your own proposal, yes?"

Which it then insists is "a cultural institution." The civil institution is defined as "civil marriage." The idea of the definition is to properly divide the religious wackos from everyone else so they can live in the world of Adam and Eve making little Adams and Eves, and everyone else can get income tax benefits.

DEFINING: The term “Marriage” for purposes of this resolution as the union of two people, naturally able to, through their own interactions, procreate their species;

DEFINING: The term “Civil Marriage” as the legal contract of two or more people whereby the two or more people are “incorporated” into a single legal entity pursuant to law;

[Tzorsland]

OOC: No, Araraukar doesn't do actual eugenics, it regulates population control, and tries to make sure every child is wanted and planned and that the parents are able to provide them a happy and safe childhood. And yes, Johan may be misunderstanding the proposal contents, but it doesn't look like Tsor is exactly serious with this anyway.

OOC: But the line doesn't mention "population control" but "controlling its own population growth." The former is always restrictive the later is not. You could have a situation where the government sees a vested interest in an increase in the population growth (perhaps due to loosing population due to war).

Let's go to the REAL WORLD ...Battling the low birthrate - Japan Times - April 7, 2015

The updated outline of government measures to fight Japan’s low birthrate sets the right policy direction by calling for public support aimed at encouraging young people to marry among the steps to address the nation’s demographic woes. But policymakers need to be aware that such efforts are not going to immediately halt the population’s downtrend. What’s needed will be steady long-term efforts to implement necessary steps.

This is another reason why I am using the sword to cut the Gordian Knot of procreation and financial living together. If a government wants to promote the growth of their population, they don't want the non discrimination clauses of other resolutions waste their efforts towards male gendered polygamous groups dedicated towards celibacy (they call them monasteries by the way).

Am I serious? Yes. But on the other hand, I'm not going to invest too much into a process which no one will ever notice in the first place.

[Araraukar]

OOC: But the line doesn't mention "population control" but "controlling its own population growth."

OOC: I know. A mental typo. I corrected it in my post.

You could have a situation where the government sees a vested interest in an increase in the population growth (perhaps due to loosing population due to war).

Araraukar is actually trying to lower its population in a controllable manner, and it's starting to work, slowly.

Let's go to the REAL WORLD

But that's such a messy place...

Am I serious? Yes.

In that case, illegal for contradicting CoCR. "Fertility" is certainly an arbitrary category, when it comes to equal rights concerning personal unions...

[Tzorsland]

In that case, illegal for contradicting CoCR. "Fertility" is certainly an arbitrary category, when it comes to equal rights concerning personal unions...

I'm still not sure how defining terms can contradict the CoCR. Does a definition "discriminate?"

And again, "Personal unions" falls into the other (for purposes of this resolution) definition, "is a contract subject to all the standard contract law of nations and all such regulations on contract law by the World Assembly" which neither mentions fertility nor mentions religion or culture.

I suspect you are not seeing what is actually happening in the text. The religious context of marriage is placed in a nice container, covered in bubble wrap and placed in a corner (unless you want to promote having more children in your nation ... population control is typically done with abortion enforced one child policies and not covered in this resolution) and then took a absolute solid libertarian view of marriage (it's just a contract) and basically allows an almost "anything goes" approach in its application (same sex, check, polygamy, check, variable term contracts, check).

In 1997, libertarian David Boaz wrote an article for Slate titled “Privatize Marriage: A Simple Solution to the Gay-Marriage Debate." In the article, Boaz suggests privatizing marriage in a way that models the nature of standard business contracts. Boaz's idea is to allow two (possibly more) individuals to set the terms of their own private marital contract in a way that is best for the individuals involved. "When children or large sums of money are involved, an enforceable contract spelling out the parties' respective rights and obligations is probably advisable. But the existence and details of such an agreement should be up to the parties." According to Boaz the government could be called upon to enforce the contract but may have no other role in developing the contract and setting the terms.

DECLARES: That civil marriage is a contract subject to all the standard contract law of nations and all such regulations on contract law by the World Assembly.

If you can come up with a way to move the religious aspect completely out of the law and define a purely libertarian contract law of unions that doesn't get into the tl;dr problem, let me know.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Opposed.

[The Greater Siriusian Domain]

Opposed.

Teran Saber: "The Greater Siriusian Domain stands beside Imperium Anglorum on this one."

[Fauxia]

Opposed.

Teran Saber: "The Greater Siriusian Domain stands beside Imperium Anglorum on this one."

“Would our opposition change your minds, ambassadors?”

[Bears Armed]

Let's go to the REAL WORLD ...Battling the low birthrate - Japan Times - April 7, 2015

The updated outline of government measures to fight Japan’s low birthrate sets the right policy direction by calling for public support aimed at encouraging young people to marry among the steps to address the nation’s demographic woes. But policymakers need to be aware that such efforts are not going to immediately halt the population’s downtrend. What’s needed will be steady long-term efforts to implement necessary steps.

OOC
Or over to RL Paraguay after the 19th Century's 'War of the Triple Alliance', when that country had lost so many of its men (after its dictator decided that fighting simultaneously against Brazil, Argentina [or that might still have been 'the United Provinces of La Plata', back then], and Uruguay, would be a good idea!) that the government decided it was necessary to to legalize polygamy...