SB 119-15: Freedom for the People of the Pacific--Passed

[fhtagn]

Weird that this is called Freedom for the People of the Pacific when it includes territories that are not part of the Pacific.

Also weird that a claimed anti-secession Senator supports secession for some Atlasians but not all.

[fhtagn]

Also worth noting that in order to allow independence for any of the states listed in this proposal, a constitutional amendment would need to be made to allow secession.

As of right now, this bill isn't constitutional.

[fhtagn]

No region or other entity under the jurisdiction of this Constitution at the date of its original adoption shall secede from this Republic, nor shall any Region, state, or other entity declare itself outside the jurisdiction of this Constitution.

I would argue it's not secession since it's the federal government that releases those territories in the first place.

1. there is no secession
2. There is no declaration of being outside the juridisiction of this constitution since "federal government" isn't included in this text.

A bill cannot allow states to decide their status in the union, especially when those states are explicitly outlined in the Constitution, and when you were one of the people who pushed for banning secession in our Constitution for dumb reasons.

This bill is literally endorsing secession.

[fhtagn]

Also worth noting that in order to allow independence for any of the states listed in this proposal, a constitutional amendment would need to be made to allow secession.

As of right now, this bill isn't constitutional.

Than why did you vote for the "say no to imperialism" act?

The text of the bill applies to territories, not states.

[fhtagn]

Also worth noting that in order to allow independence for any of the states listed in this proposal, a constitutional amendment would need to be made to allow secession.

As of right now, this bill isn't constitutional.

Than why did you vote for the "say no to imperialism" act?

The text of the bill applies to territories, not states.

Well if you want the text of the constitution to be discussed again, i introduced a bill that would remove that amendment. It's dumb anyways to include that in a constitution... but everyone else seems to disagree. Outside of the game, i'd probably always vehemently against something like that in a constitution because it goes against everything i believe in and against the right of self determination. Some people unironically believe it's a good thing - aside of the game - to have that in a constitution because they're consistently anti-secession and pro-oppression.

the only issue, there would be no purpose for this game in case - and that's what you want - the regions split up.

Nothing about Southern secession would have ended the game, and there's no evidence to support that claim.

[fhtagn]

Just reminding the Senators that are pretending to be anti-secession on another bill, but seem to have no issues with this bill:

This bill is literally endorsing secession.

We cannot pass this bill without amending the Constitution to allow for states to leave the Union.

[fhtagn]

Aye