Public Office of the Leinad/Lumine Administration - Goodbye, Farewell, and Amen

[Lincoln Republican]

Oh yes, because a fine of $50,000,00 per day is soooooooo realistic.

If you are going to craft a fantasyland completely one sided bill, at least make it semi believable.

And your part about denying parental permission for what happens to their own minor children is so progressive.

Why don't you simply deny parents any and all authority over their minor children and take minors out of their homes and away from their parents and indoctrinate them with your preferred way of anything goes LGBTQ philosophy?

Clearly, the authors of this bill have absolutely no clue about parental/child relationships.  Why don't you just impose a fine of $100,000.00 per day for parents who want the right to care themselves for their minor children?

Now, your definition of marriage is a reeeeeeeeeeal gem.

"Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two consenting persons to the exclusion of all others."

Which of you geniuses thought this up?  You have just opened the door to some 50 year old pervert to marry a six year old child.

Yup, that's quite the forward looking bill you have there.


    

[Lincoln Republican]

The legislation clearly states "two consenting persons".

You may want to go back to the books and change the wording so it is clear and unequivocal.

[Lincoln Republican]

Perhaps one of you who supported and voted for this legislation could explain to me how the government can legally pass legislation which takes away parental rights for what medical procedures their minor children undergo.

Explain to me what in the constitution states that the government has the right to carry out medical procedures on minor children without the consent of their parents.

And don't all of you run away from this inquiry at the same time.   

[Lincoln Republican]

We aren't going into uncharted territory, here. This lists instances when minors can seek treatment without parental consent, and there are others as well.

I repeat, is this right for the Senate to usurp parental rights embedded in the Atlasian constitution or is it not?

[Lincoln Republican]

We aren't going into uncharted territory, here. This lists instances when minors can seek treatment without parental consent, and there are others as well.

I repeat, is this right for the Senate to usurp parental rights embedded in the Atlasian constitution or is it not?

What clause are you referring to?

Section 2, Part 2

Section 2. The Right to Security in One's Own Body

1. All insurers within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Atlasia shall be required to cover options for hormone replacement therapy and puberty blockers.

2. There shall be no requirement that parents or guardians consent to a minor accessing puberty blockers.

[Lincoln Republican]

We aren't going into uncharted territory, here. This lists instances when minors can seek treatment without parental consent, and there are others as well.

I repeat, is this right for the Senate to usurp parental rights embedded in the Atlasian constitution or is it not?

What clause are you referring to?

Section 2, Part 2

Section 2. The Right to Security in One's Own Body

1. All insurers within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Atlasia shall be required to cover options for hormone replacement therapy and puberty blockers.

2. There shall be no requirement that parents or guardians consent to a minor accessing puberty blockers.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. What part of the constitution are you referring to that guarantees parents/guardians the right to be able to consent on anything medical on their children?

My question is, IS there anything in the constitution that states that the Atlasian government has the right to usurp parental authority over minors?

I am not referring to any part of the constitution, simply IF THERE IS anything in the constitution, anywhere, that allows the government to usurp parental authority of their minors?

[Lincoln Republican]

It is hard to argue that something is "embedded in the constitution" then not have any part of the constitution to reference for that. I can ask you the same question: where in the constitution does it give parents the right to usurp medical decisions from minors? That being said, I'll fall back on Article V, Section I, because the right to life and liberty extend to all Atlasians, not just those who are 18 and over.

In other words, your actions in usurping the authority of parents in matters relating to their minor children are ultra vires of the Atlasian constitution. 

Precedent is, clearly, that parents make the decisions in matters relating to their minor children.

Your using Article V, Section I in matters such as this is a stretch.

And it has become clear to me that this Senate is bound and determined to impose the radical gay agenda, and let me say, is determined to impose the radical LGBTQ agenda upon Atlasia, no matter what, legal or not.

[Lincoln Republican]

winfield, why do you think parents should be able to withhold necessary medical care from their children?

"They have been used by transgender children. Children can be prescribed puberty blockers, with their parent's permission, by an endocrinologist, usually after psychiatric or mental health evaluations. Puberty blockers take the form of a monthly injection. Currently, treatment including puberty blockers are not worldwide."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puberty_blocker

[Lincoln Republican]

It is hard to argue that something is "embedded in the constitution" then not have any part of the constitution to reference for that. I can ask you the same question: where in the constitution does it give parents the right to usurp medical decisions from minors? That being said, I'll fall back on Article V, Section I, because the right to life and liberty extend to all Atlasians, not just those who are 18 and over.

In other words, your actions in usurping the authority of parents in matters relating to their minor children are ultra vires of the Atlasian constitution. 

Precedent is, clearly, that parents make the decisions in matters relating to their minor children.

Your using Article V, Section I in matters such as this is a stretch.

And it has become clear to me that this Senate is bound and determined to impose the radical gay agenda, and let me say, is determined to impose the radical LGBTQ agenda upon Atlasia, no matter what, legal or not.

As I have said multiple times and will continue to say, if you or others would like to offer an amended version of the legislation, you are welcome to do so. In terms of the Senate, it was adequately debated for more than the required time and was voted on without any objections. This wasn't shoved through - I performed as PPT as I was supposed to, so I'm unsure as to why people continue to specifically target the Senate.

In the time that those opposed to this bill have spent complaining about it after the fact, an amended version could have been offered and we could have already started the debate in Congress.

Senator tmth, now, you know as well as I do, that putting forward any amendments for the Senate in the matter of any changes to this radical LGBTQ legislation would fall on deaf ears, and be soundly voted down by the Senate.

[Lincoln Republican]

Precedent is, clearly, that parents make the decisions in matters relating to their minor children.

Please provide legal prcedent in Atlasia.

And it has become clear to me that this Senate is bound and determined to impose the radical gay agenda, and let me say, is determined to impose the radical LGBTQ agenda upon Atlasia, no matter what, legal or not

You discredit yourself. I voted for you once. Never again.

1.  Legal precedent, please refer to the example cited by Senator tmth IRL situations in this matter to justify the usurpation of parental rights.  The same logic can be used for precedent IRL regarding parents and their minor children.  If you can use it, I can use it. 

2.  Well, thank you for your vote my friend.  Greatly appreciated.  You know, the right to choose who governs us is the very essence of democracy.  Also, the right to free and open debate on issues is fundamental to democracy, and, clearly, when one takes a stand on issues, they are bound to not please everyone, so I fully respect your decision not to vote for me ever again.  That is your right and your privilege.

And don't ever let anyone convince you to vote for me again. 

[Lincoln Republican]

You mean you haven't heard about the attempted coup that happened while you were gone?