Pacific Legislature Official Thread

[Alcon]

If anyone chooses to introduce any debate onto the condensed form of the bill, please do so.  Otherwise, voting will begin.

For the Children Act of 2006
1. All residents of the Southeast will be recognised by the Pacific Regional Government as "Bubba."

2. In the unlikely event that the Southeast ever gets a female resident, she will be referred to as "Bubba Phyllis."

3. The Pacific Regional Government henceforth considers the Southeastern Region to be an island, surrounded by water on all four sides.

4. June 3rd, previously Jefferson Davis Day, will now be recognised as Day of Pale White Men with High Cheekbones.

5. The current Southeastern Governor, and all subsequent Southeastern Governors, will be declared the State Tree of all states in the Pacific Region.   Southeastern Lt. Governors will be declared the State Squaredance.

6. The penalty for breaching of this act is social ostracisation and ten minutes of freakishly high-speed community service.

7. The Southeast is the worst region ever and really should take a bath and implement water chlorination or something.

8. All Southeasterners are communists.

9. The Southeast no longer borders the Pacific via Texas, because that would just be really icky to be that close to the Southeast.

10. The Southeast is not allowed to retaliate for anything because the Pacific is rubber and the Southeast is glue and whatever they do bounces off of us and sticks to them.

11. The Pacific Region is officially declared the best region ever.

[Gabu]

Of course in a millitary conflict, an army of southrons led by General Cosmo Kramer would trounce an army of pacificans led by General Gabu.

If you wanted to invade the Pacific, then you would have to go through some other region, because no border between the Pacific and the Southeast exists, you see.

*consults military advisers on Oklahoma's defensive preparedness*

Eh, don't worry.  I wouldn't try to invade through Oklahoma.  More than likely I'd ignore there little piece of legislation and steamroll right in.

And then your troops would, apparently, fall into the infinite vacuum that now exists between the Pacific and the Southeast.

Obviously.

Cosmo Kramer is not very good at comprehending the "big picture" and is also not very good at staying up with the times, given that he still persists in thinking that a border exists between the Southeast and Pacific, when in fact there quite clearly is none.

[Platypus]

If anyone chooses to introduce any debate onto the condensed form of the bill, please do so.  Otherwise, voting will begin.

For the Children Act of 2006
1. All residents of the Southeast will be recognised by the Pacific Regional Government as "Bubba."

2. In the unlikely event that the Southeast ever gets a female resident, she will be referred to as "Bubba Phyllis."

3. The Pacific Regional Government henceforth considers the Southeastern Region to be an island, surrounded by water on all four sides.

4. June 3rd, previously Jefferson Davis Day, will now be recognised as Day of Pale White Men with High Cheekbones.

5. The current Southeastern Governor, and all subsequent Southeastern Governors, will be declared the State Tree of all states in the Pacific Region.   Southeastern Lt. Governors will be declared the State Squaredance.

6. The penalty for breaching of this act is social ostracisation and ten minutes of freakishly high-speed community service.

7. The Southeast is the worst region ever and really should take a bath and implement water chlorination or something.

8. All Southeasterners are communists.

9. The Southeast no longer borders the Pacific via Texas, because that would just be really icky to be that close to the Southeast.

10. The Southeast is not allowed to retaliate for anything because the Pacific is rubber and the Southeast is glue and whatever they do bounces off of us and sticks to them.

11. The Pacific Region is officially declared the best region ever.

You forgot the poohole bit.

[Platypus]

3. The Southeast no longer borders the Pacific via Texas, because that would just be really icky to be that close to the Southeast.

What?  Are you going to give New Mexico to the Midwest to sever the border?

No.  We're just disavowing all knowledge of there ever being a border.  It no longer exists.

So the gaping vacuum just past NM's borders is causing all this damn wind here, eh?

That or the Chilli.

[Alcon]

If no one has any additional matters to bring up, I will be bringing this act to a vote.

[WMS]

3. The Southeast no longer borders the Pacific via Texas, because that would just be really icky to be that close to the Southeast.

What?  Are you going to give New Mexico to the Midwest to sever the border?

No.  We're just disavowing all knowledge of there ever being a border.  It no longer exists.

So the gaping vacuum just past NM's borders is causing all this damn wind here, eh?

That or the Chilli.

*drumroll*
The beans do that, not the Chile.

[Alcon]

Please vote aye, nay, or abstain.

For the Children Act of 2006
1. All residents of the Southeast will be recognised by the Pacific Regional Government as "Bubba."

2. In the unlikely event that the Southeast ever gets a female resident, she will be referred to as "Bubba Phyllis."

3. The Pacific Regional Government henceforth considers the Southeastern Region to be an island, surrounded by water on all four sides.

4. June 3rd, previously Jefferson Davis Day, will now be recognised as Day of Pale White Men with High Cheekbones.

5. The current Southeastern Governor, and all subsequent Southeastern Governors, will be declared the State Tree of all states in the Pacific Region.   Southeastern Lt. Governors will be declared the State Squaredance.

6. The penalty for breaching of this act is social ostracisation and ten minutes of freakishly high-speed community service.

7. The Southeast is the worst region ever and really should take a bath and implement water chlorination or something.

8. All Southeasterners are communists.

9. The Southeast no longer borders the Pacific via Texas, because that would just be really icky to be that close to the Southeast.

10. The Southeast is not allowed to retaliate for anything because the Pacific is rubber and the Southeast is glue and whatever they do bounces off of us and sticks to them.

11. The Pacific Region is officially declared the best region ever.

[Gabu]

AYE for great justice!!111

[Alcon]

Aye

[bgwah]

Aye!

[jokerman]

If this mockery of a bill passes I will be forced to retaliate.

[Platypus]

Still no poohole bit :mad:

Aye, anyway.

[Gabu]

If this mockery of a bill passes I will be forced to retaliate.

I hope you don't order your troops to march into the infinite vacuum, because that would just not be good leadership.

[WMS]

If this mockery of a bill passes I will be forced to retaliate.

I hope you don't order your troops to march into the infinite vacuum, because that would just not be good leadership.

Aye just because I want to see what Preston will do next, not because I have anything against the Southeast

[Alcon]

Voting will close on April 1st.

[WMS]

Voting will close on April 1st.

How appropriate...

[Alcon]

The For the Children Act of 2006 has passed 5-0.

[Gabu]

The For the Children Act of 2006 has passed 5-0.

This is a truly great day for Atlasians everywhere.

Except for those in the Bad Place.

[Peter]

I seek to introduce the following bill before the Pacific legislature. It is an effective consolidation of similar bills that I proposed in the Mideast. For a graphical representation of the provisions of section 3, see here. Red is first degree stat. rape, Orange is second degree; Yellow is carnal sexual conduct; Green is legal.

Pacific Pornography and Sex Crime Bill
Section 1: Right to pornography
   1. All those persons of 16 years of age or older not incarcerated for crimes shall have the right to buy, possess and view pornography depicting only consenting persons of 18 years of age or older.

Section 2: Right to engage in sexual relations
   1. All those persons of 16 years of age or older not incarcerated for crimes shall have the right to give consent to engage in sexual acts, including sodomy, with other persons of 16 years of age or older.
   2. All those persons between the ages of 14 years old and 16 years old not incarcerated for crimes shall have the right to consent to engage in oral sex or mutual masturbation with persons between the ages of 14 years old and 18 years old.
   3. All those Laws criminalising solitary masturbation are repealed.
   4. All those laws outlawing particular sexual conducts based on the number of persons engaged in the conduct are hereby repealed.
   5. All those laws outlawing particular sexual conducts based on the sex, sexuality, marital status, race, religion, ancestry or nationality of those engaged in the conduct are hereby repealed.

Section 3: Definition of sex crimes
   1. Any sexual conduct with a person under the age of 14 years by a person over the age of 21 years is defined as statutory rape of the first degree.
   2. Any sexual conduct with a person under the age of 12 years by a person over the age of 18 years is defined as statutory rape of the first degree.
   3. Any sexual conduct with a person under the age of 10 years by a person over the age of 16 years is defined as statutory rape of the first degree.
   4. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 14 and 16 years by a person over the age of 21 years is defined as statutory rape of the second degree.
   5. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 10 and 12 years by a person between the ages of 16 and 18 years is defined as statutory rape of the second degree.
   6. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 12 and 14 years by a person between the ages of 18 and 21 is defined as statutory rape of the second degree.
   7. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 14 and 16 years by a person between the ages of 18 and 21 is defined as carnal sexual conduct.
   8. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 12 and 14 years by a person between the ages of 16 and 18 is defined as carnal sexual conduct.
   9. Any sexual conduct, except oral sex and mutual masturbation, with a person between the ages of 14 and 16 by a person between the ages of 16 and 18 is defined as carnal sexual conduct.
  10. The clauses in this Section shall only apply to circumstances where all parties involved in the sexual conduct were willing, even though they are unable under the Law to give informed, legal consent.

Section 4: Punishment for sex crimes
   1. Those guilty of Carnal Sexual Conduct may be punished by up to six months in prison and a fine of up to $1000. If released, a person guilty of this crime shall not be placed on the Sex Offenders Register.
   2. Those guilty of Statutory Rape of the Second Degree may be punished by up to ten years in prison and a fine of up to $7500. If released a person guilty of this crime shall be placed on the Sex Offenders Register for up to twenty years.
   3. Those guilty of Statutory Rape of the First Degree may be punished by up to life in prison and an unlimited fine. If released, a person guilty of this crime shall be placed on the Sex Offenders Register for life

Section 5: Construction
   1. Nothing in Sections 3 and 4 shall be construed to amend in anyway the definitions of, or punishments for, rape where consent by one of the parties involved is not given.

[jerusalemcar5]

If it may please the legislature, I'd like to say that passage of such a bill would be disgustingly prejudicial based on age, oppressive, and undemocratic.  I'd just like to point out a couple of many ridiculous clauses. According to Section 3 Clause 9 and Section 4 Clause 1 a 16 yr old who has sex with a 15 yr old can get 6 months in prison. 6 months! For having sex! Section 3 Clause 8 a 16 yr old who has oral sex or touches sexually a 14 yr old, 6 months imprisonment also. Other clauses, though not quite as outlandish as the ones mentioned, are too restricitve and base this restriction based on biased stereoptyping about age.  I strongly urge all true Atlasiana that support democracy to reject this bill in its entirety. Thank you.

I seek to introduce the following bill before the Pacific legislature. It is an effective consolidation of similar bills that I proposed in the Mideast. For a graphical representation of the provisions of section 3, see here. Red is first degree stat. rape, Orange is second degree; Yellow is carnal sexual conduct; Green is legal.

Pacific Pornography and Sex Crime Bill
Section 1: Right to pornography
   1. All those persons of 16 years of age or older not incarcerated for crimes shall have the right to buy, possess and view pornography depicting only consenting persons of 18 years of age or older.

Section 2: Right to engage in sexual relations
   1. All those persons of 16 years of age or older not incarcerated for crimes shall have the right to give consent to engage in sexual acts, including sodomy, with other persons of 16 years of age or older.
   2. All those persons between the ages of 14 years old and 16 years old not incarcerated for crimes shall have the right to consent to engage in oral sex or mutual masturbation with persons between the ages of 14 years old and 18 years old.
   3. All those Laws criminalising solitary masturbation are repealed.
   4. All those laws outlawing particular sexual conducts based on the number of persons engaged in the conduct are hereby repealed.
   5. All those laws outlawing particular sexual conducts based on the sex, sexuality, marital status, race, religion, ancestry or nationality of those engaged in the conduct are hereby repealed.

Section 3: Definition of sex crimes
   1. Any sexual conduct with a person under the age of 14 years by a person over the age of 21 years is defined as statutory rape of the first degree.
   2. Any sexual conduct with a person under the age of 12 years by a person over the age of 18 years is defined as statutory rape of the first degree.
   3. Any sexual conduct with a person under the age of 10 years by a person over the age of 16 years is defined as statutory rape of the first degree.
   4. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 14 and 16 years by a person over the age of 21 years is defined as statutory rape of the second degree.
   5. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 10 and 12 years by a person between the ages of 16 and 18 years is defined as statutory rape of the second degree.
   6. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 12 and 14 years by a person between the ages of 18 and 21 is defined as statutory rape of the second degree.
   7. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 14 and 16 years by a person between the ages of 18 and 21 is defined as carnal sexual conduct.
   8. Any sexual conduct with a person between the ages of 12 and 14 years by a person between the ages of 16 and 18 is defined as carnal sexual conduct.
   9. Any sexual conduct, except oral sex and mutual masturbation, with a person between the ages of 14 and 16 by a person between the ages of 16 and 18 is defined as carnal sexual conduct.
  10. The clauses in this Section shall only apply to circumstances where all parties involved in the sexual conduct were willing, even though they are unable under the Law to give informed, legal consent.

Section 4: Punishment for sex crimes
   1. Those guilty of Carnal Sexual Conduct may be punished by up to six months in prison and a fine of up to $1000. If released, a person guilty of this crime shall not be placed on the Sex Offenders Register.
   2. Those guilty of Statutory Rape of the Second Degree may be punished by up to ten years in prison and a fine of up to $7500. If released a person guilty of this crime shall be placed on the Sex Offenders Register for up to twenty years.
   3. Those guilty of Statutory Rape of the First Degree may be punished by up to life in prison and an unlimited fine. If released, a person guilty of this crime shall be placed on the Sex Offenders Register for life

Section 5: Construction
   1. Nothing in Sections 3 and 4 shall be construed to amend in anyway the definitions of, or punishments for, rape where consent by one of the parties involved is not given.

[Ebowed]

Wait, so are you arguing against an age of consent altogether?

[jerusalemcar5]

Wait, so are you arguing against an age of consent altogether?

Yes, though the age of consent is confusing in this bill since it depends on which sexual act you are committing.  How am I too immature to consent to sex with a 25 yr old (I'm 15)? That just makes no sense.  You cannot group people by age, race, sex, religion, or other meaningless factors.  Being a teenager doesn't mean you can't maturely consider your actions and neither does being a women or being black. 

[WMS]

And so Peter Bell finds something entertaining to do.  *pops popcorn and settles back to read the debate*

[Ebowed]

How am I too immature to consent to sex with a 25 yr old (I'm 15)? That just makes no sense.  You cannot group people by age, race, sex, religion, or other meaningless factors.  Being a teenager doesn't mean you can't maturely consider your actions and neither does being a women or being black. 

This is a bit strange cos I remember you arguing that history months based on race are not inherently discriminatory.

Honestly, your argument wouldn't hold up anywhere.  It is pretty much universally agreed that pedophilia is unacceptable; that's why we have an age of consent.  This proposed law actually lowers the age of consent in many cases, as real-life laws that the Pacific are based on are more strict than Peter's proposal.

[jerusalemcar5]

How am I too immature to consent to sex with a 25 yr old (I'm 15)? That just makes no sense.  You cannot group people by age, race, sex, religion, or other meaningless factors.  Being a teenager doesn't mean you can't maturely consider your actions and neither does being a women or being black. 

This is a bit strange cos I remember you arguing that history months based on race are not inherently discriminatory.

Honestly, your argument wouldn't hold up anywhere.  It is pretty much universally agreed that pedophilia is unacceptable; that's why we have an age of consent.  This proposed law actually lowers the age of consent in many cases, as real-life laws that the Pacific are based on are more strict than Peter's proposal.

They are stricter usually for intercourse, not other sexual acts. 

And honoring a group of people based in their accomplishments and aid to society is different from imprisoning them based on their group.  One is positive and kind, the other is negative and condesending.  I support the limit for non-teenagers, but teenagers can make informed decisions.  You cannot say that an 18 yr old having sex witha 55 yr old is OK then turn around and say a 16 yr old having sex witha 22 yr old isn't. It's discrimination, plai and simple.