Animal Protection Act [LAW'D]

[tmthforu94]

I assume Section 2 is supposed to read Atlasia and not the Mideast?

I would like clarification regarding Sections 2 and 3. Do the abuses listed in Section 3 apply to animals slaughtered for food or are those animals exempt from them?

Yes, you are correct. Badger and I did this together, and we ended up taking part of the Mideast act on it and changing it to nationally.

Section 2 states specifically that "Killing Animals for food" is perfectly legal, and from section 3, that is okay as long as you do not torture the animal in any way while raising it. So slaughtering animals for food would be considered legal.

[tmthforu94]

I accept Badger's amendment as friendly.

[tmthforu94]

Aye

[tmthforu94]

I'm sorry Bacon King, but this bill does require an amendment.  Section 2 identifies "the Mideast", where it appears "Atlasia" was the intended text.  I believe this was brought up previously in discussion, but the change was never made.  I request a halt to the vote so this change can be written into the bill.

I contacted Bacon King, asking him to change that, but in order to do so, would he have to restart the vote as well?

[tmthforu94]

Once again we find that instead of lobbying Regional gov'ts to make reform we see an attempt to take a bill from one region and enforce it at the national level. I don't see a purpurse in getting the federal gov't involved in this so:


NAY

Nice of you to join us, after the final vote started...

It kind of bugs me that you won't express your concerns before the vote, to give supporters of this bill a chance to answer your concerns. Badger and I, as co-author's, don't know your problems with it if you just stay mum until the vote.

[tmthforu94]

Once again we find that instead of lobbying Regional gov'ts to make reform we see an attempt to take a bill from one region and enforce it at the national level. I don't see a purpurse in getting the federal gov't involved in this so:


NAY

Nice of you to join us, after the final vote started...

It kind of bugs me that you won't express your concerns before the vote, to give supporters of this bill a chance to answer your concerns. Badger and I, as co-author's, don't know your problems with it if you just stay mum until the vote.

Well sorry, I have been busy these last few days.

Also, it is hardly something you can amend.

You could at least give us an opportunity to defend ourselves before making a decision...
In the real world, I would never introduce this on a national level, and leave it to states. However, not all regions on Atlasia are active. You may say "leave it to the regions", but most regions won't do anything at all. So we have to intervene and create it for them.

[tmthforu94]

Nay

I'm not sure this bill is necessary in the slightest.

So it isn't necessary to stop the cruelty shown at thousands of animals each day?

[tmthforu94]

Several of the regions are quite inactive, and something like this has never really gone to their attention. Someone had to take action to stop the deaths of millions of animals, and Badger and I thought "Hey, this might as well be us."
Cruelty and death isn't a regional issue. It shouldn't be something regions decide whether or not they'll allow.

[tmthforu94]

Which are inactive?

The Pacific is rather inactive.

Friends, we have a chance today to pass an important piece of legislation that will fight to end the cruelty of animals. Or, we can "leave it to the regions", which could take weeks, even months to complete. In that time, over one hundred thousand animals will probably die due to cruelty or neglect. Thousands of animals, because a few insisted that regional rights were more important than animal rights in this case.

[tmthforu94]

Which are inactive?

The Pacific is rather inactive.

Friends, we have a chance today to pass an important piece of legislation that will fight to end the cruelty of animals. Or, we can "leave it to the regions", which could take weeks, even months to complete. In that time, over one hundred thousand animals will probably die due to cruelty or neglect. Thousands of animals, because a few insisted that regional rights were more important than animal rights in this case.

This bill will magically stop the cruelty occurring to these animals upon its passing? Hardly. No need to drum up hysteria. Besides the Pacific, all regions are capable of passing something like this whenever they so please. We don't need the federal government making all the laws for the regions. Let them decide.

In the meantime, thousands of animals can die in the process of these bills getting through. This is election season, and I doubt it would pass in any region within the next couple weeks. But seeing as this Senate simply thinks preserving regional rights is more important than saving the deaths of thousands animals, I guess we'll just have to hope regions do this as quickly as possible.

[tmthforu94]

This debate has gotten very very childish and ridiculous.

Why yes, yes it has:

You sould like a Liberal. You hide behind furry little creatures like Liberals hide behind Children, the poor, and Seniors.

Indeed the fact that he is acting like that is childish. I have every right to point it out, Bgwah.

Oh, come on now. I defend my furry friends, you attack liberals. You are no better than I. Do I realize this is unrealistic? Of course. But we have to make this as realistic and interesting as possible, otherwise this game will fail of boredom. In reality, animals are dying every day, and laws like this could be inacted to protect them.

[tmthforu94]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Heavens no, I love meat! I just don't like the torture of animals. It makes me think "That could have been my dog" everytime I see neglect and torture take place.

[tmthforu94]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Heavens no, I love meat! I just don't like the torture of animals. It makes me think "That could have been my dog" everytime I see neglect and torture take place.

Fascinating logic...

My dog was rescused from the streets, if that makes more sense...

[tmthforu94]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Heavens no, I love meat! I just don't like the torture of animals. It makes me think "That could have been my dog" everytime I see neglect and torture take place.

Fascinating logic...

My dog was rescused from the streets, if that makes more sense...

And you have no problem killing animals as smart as your dog for your own personal pleasure... Interesting...

I never said my dog was smart.
This bill aims to prevent people from killing animals for pure enjoyment, but only for food.

[tmthforu94]

Well I always thought the Schools were purposely indoctrinating the kiddies to love furry creatures a little more then they otherwise would or should (to further the enviro-facist adjenda). I must say, I find it this whole thing lolish for that reason, forgive me while I ROTFLOL.

What is an enviro-fascist?

Extreme Environmentalism to the point of wanting to destroy and as Obama's technology Tsar said "de-industrialize" America, which in my opinion is just a stalking horse for socialism. Carbon taxes, Cap-n-trade, and draconing restrictions that make certain economic activities impossible even if they could benefit the local environment or the environment in general. Such has holding up the building of a Hydro-plant for a fish or relatively safe offshore drilling of Natural Gas and oil but especially the Natural Gas from which the revenues and taxes can be put into conservation efforts. Forcing people to buy or preventing them from buying certain things to reduce the amount of carbon in the atmosphere by like .0001%.

This is not to be confused with reasonable efforst to conserve resources, protect wildlife (that are trully in danger), and moves towards greater efficiency. Its up to the individual to judge the differences. The best way to improve efficiency and reduce emissions and waste is technological advancement not policies that sacrifice much for little gain.

With respect, Yank, I don't begin to see how this particular bill can be remotely compared to "enviro-facism" as you define it.

I never said that it was. I was making a dig at Tmth.

Game over, you failed.

[tmthforu94]

It appears that the primary concern against this bill is a sense that this is somehow an issue that regional governments should address rather than the federal government preempting law entirely. Regardless of any federal vs. regional debate, I'm willing to concede the issue for this bill and offer the following amendment to make this a bill that will spur and encourage legislative activity at the regional level rather than inhibit it.

I realize a vote on the final bill has already started, but considering no senator but Bgwah even bothered to express their concerns about the bill before voting started, I sincerely hope that if this amendment is acceptable to the Senate then we can waive objections and merely vote on the amendment and final bill on a simple up or down vote. Considering the pre-vote silence from those with concerns over the bill which, if timely raised, could have led to a pre-vote amendment addressing those concerns, waiving such procedural objections is hardly much to ask.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Accepted as friendly, Isaac?

Accepted as friendly. I just sincerely hope the regions can act quickly on this, if it passes. Although, it'd be nice to push up the deadline on this from September. How about July? That would give them an entire 2 months, at least. It shouldn't take any region 4 months to pass a bill.

[tmthforu94]

Whoah now, hold on here. There's absolutely no way we can go back to debate guys. I'm sorry. If you like that bill enough the only procedural way we can amend this now is by passing the current bill, having afleitch veto-amend the bill to be like so, and for us to then accept his alterations.

Can we do that?
I expect this to easily pass now, as several voters claimed this was all about "regional rights", and this amendment would take wipe out the arguement. I'm asking that several Senators flip their votes if they support this amendment, so we can get it passed, then vetoed, then repassed under the proposed amendment.

[tmthforu94]

I am ready to accept those changes.

[tmthforu94]

Aye

[tmthforu94]

x Afleitch

Thank you, Mr. President.