SB 116-17: Dumb Regulations Repeal Act 22 - Tabled

[Coastal Elitist]

Hope you don’t have experience in this
Nay

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Nay on Laki's pro-incest amendment

Well, good to know that you want to observe mutual consentual individuals who have sex because you need to figure out whether they commit incest or not.

For most of the world it's tolerated, maybe Americans are just extremely conservative.

The government has no business in a bedroom.

Whether that be for incest or gay sex whatever, it is the same and it should be the standard.

As i say this is written by someone who if he gets his way would want to criminalize gay sex as well.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Nay

Laki, you do realize incest leads to more genetic disorders, right?

Most people use protection and only in rare circumstances is sex meant to reproduce nowadays.

Of course, you have right-wingers here who believe in sex after marriage or believe sex is immoral.

[Vice President Christian Man]

Nay

[West_Midlander]

Nay on Laki's pro-incest amendment

Well, good to know that you want to observe mutual consentual individuals who have sex because you need to figure out whether they commit incest or not.

For most of the world it's tolerated, maybe Americans are just extremely conservative.

The government has no business in a bedroom.

Whether that be for incest or gay sex whatever, it is the same and it should be the standard.

As i say this is written by someone who if he gets his way would want to criminalize gay sex as well.

Has R said this? Also, this is not relevant to the incest prohibition. It's like saying since you're a communist all things you support should be opposed automatically by all non-communists. It's an ad hominem attack against someone who is not even in this body anymore.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Nay on Laki's pro-incest amendment

Well, good to know that you want to observe mutual consentual individuals who have sex because you need to figure out whether they commit incest or not.

For most of the world it's tolerated, maybe Americans are just extremely conservative.

The government has no business in a bedroom.

Whether that be for incest or gay sex whatever, it is the same and it should be the standard.

As i say this is written by someone who if he gets his way would want to criminalize gay sex as well.

Has R said this? Also, this is not relevant to the incest prohibition. It's like saying since you're a communist all things you support should be opposed automatically by all non-communists. It's an ad hominem attack against someone who is not even in this body anymore.

Why do you care so much about what other people people should have sex with.

Do i need to tell my entire sex life to you so that you can judge me.

Are you willing to tell all your sex experiences in detail?

See where i'm going with this.

What stays in a bedroom, remains in a bedroom.

No need for an entire paleoconservative pathetic psychopathic sex bill that would name all 0,0001% occurences.

Should be common sense.

You don't want to do your cousin. Well good for you. Neither would I. But it should not be criminal. Period.

Same for gay sex. I am not physically attracted to gay people, but it's good that people who feel attracted to each other can have sex and marry regardless of opposite gender.

And if you want to evolve to a society where governments survey people and place cams in each others bedroom, well go ahead and defend this bill.

[fhtagn]

Leave it to Laki to publicly claim that gay sex is no different than incest.

[Lumine]

I try not to participate too much on legislative debate as VP, but I'd like to step in for a moment here and beg the Senate not to approve the amendment.

Although I'm about as anti-culture war, and opposed to Mr. R's legislative nonsense as it gets, I'd like to think we can all at least agree that incest should not be tolerated. As a matter of fact, that this has to be stated out loud is concerning enough as it is.

There is enormous merit in getting rid of the conspiracy theory nonsense that is currently on statue, but... come on. There are lines we shouldn't cross as a civilized society, and this particular topic is CLEARLY ONE OF THEM.

[West_Midlander]

Nay on Laki's pro-incest amendment

Well, good to know that you want to observe mutual consentual individuals who have sex because you need to figure out whether they commit incest or not.

For most of the world it's tolerated, maybe Americans are just extremely conservative.

The government has no business in a bedroom.

Whether that be for incest or gay sex whatever, it is the same and it should be the standard.

As i say this is written by someone who if he gets his way would want to criminalize gay sex as well.

Has R said this? Also, this is not relevant to the incest prohibition. It's like saying since you're a communist all things you support should be opposed automatically by all non-communists. It's an ad hominem attack against someone who is not even in this body anymore.

Why do you care so much about what other people people should have sex with.

Do i need to tell my entire sex life to you so that you can judge me.

Are you willing to tell all your sex experiences in detail?

See where i'm going with this.

What stays in a bedroom, remains in a bedroom.

No need for an entire paleoconservative pathetic psychopathic sex bill that would name all 0,0001% occurences.

Should be common sense.

You don't want to do your cousin. Well good for you. Neither would I. But it should not be criminal. Period.

Same for gay sex. I am not physically attracted to gay people, but it's good that people who feel attracted to each other can have sex and marry regardless of opposite gender.

And if you want to evolve to a society where governments survey people and place cams in each others bedroom, well go ahead and defend this bill.

This rant has nothing to do with my most recent comments and if Mr. R supports a ban on gay sex (which is not relevant to the incest debate) I'd like to see evidence of that, but you have failed proof of what you claim.

It seems hypocritical to condemn R on ideological grounds as a radical as you are doing now—discounting his recent support for an attempted independent South since this is not what you are attacking him over—when he was tolerated as Peace Party member for many months, including after this legislation originally passed. In fact, it seemed that you, Scott, and R informally composed Peace leadership for months from late last year to early 2023. Afaik R was nearly omnipresent in private negotiations on behalf of Peace that I was aware of. During this whole time, of course, his ideology never shifted, so I don't know how you can be diametrically opposed to him on non-Unionist ideological grounds while allying him before.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Nay on Laki's pro-incest amendment

Well, good to know that you want to observe mutual consentual individuals who have sex because you need to figure out whether they commit incest or not.

For most of the world it's tolerated, maybe Americans are just extremely conservative.

The government has no business in a bedroom.

Whether that be for incest or gay sex whatever, it is the same and it should be the standard.

As i say this is written by someone who if he gets his way would want to criminalize gay sex as well.

Has R said this? Also, this is not relevant to the incest prohibition. It's like saying since you're a communist all things you support should be opposed automatically by all non-communists. It's an ad hominem attack against someone who is not even in this body anymore.

Why do you care so much about what other people people should have sex with.

Do i need to tell my entire sex life to you so that you can judge me.

Are you willing to tell all your sex experiences in detail?

See where i'm going with this.

What stays in a bedroom, remains in a bedroom.

No need for an entire paleoconservative pathetic psychopathic sex bill that would name all 0,0001% occurences.

Should be common sense.

You don't want to do your cousin. Well good for you. Neither would I. But it should not be criminal. Period.

Same for gay sex. I am not physically attracted to gay people, but it's good that people who feel attracted to each other can have sex and marry regardless of opposite gender.

And if you want to evolve to a society where governments survey people and place cams in each others bedroom, well go ahead and defend this bill.

This rant has nothing to do with my most recent comments and if Mr. R supports a ban on gay sex (which is not relevant to the incest debate) I'd like to see evidence of that, but you have failed proof of what you claim.

It seems hypocritical to condemn R on ideological grounds as a radical as you are doing now—discounting his recent support for an attempted independent South since this is not what you are attacking him over—when he was tolerated as Peace Party member for many months, including after this legislation originally passed. In fact, it seemed that you, Scott, and R informally composed Peace leadership for months from late last year to early 2023. Afaik R was nearly omnipresent in private negotiations on behalf of Peace that I was aware of. During this whole time, of course, his ideology never shifted, so I don't know how you can be diametrically opposed to him on non-Unionist ideological grounds while allying him before.

I have no proof of whether R supports a ban on gay sex and you're right that I should not attack him on that.

But i've always expressed - even when the bill was in the senate - opposition to the bill, and i just broadly think that the government has no business in what happens in the bedroom if two adults show mutual consent, regardless of gender, affiliaty etc.

I referred to gay sex because if we would have been transported 20 years back in time, i'm quite sure gay sex would have been included in the bill, and that's no criticism towards R, because it would simply also have passed in the senate. I based that on the opposition on the idea that the government has no business in determining what happens in the bedroom.

You may have moral and ethical concerns about incest, i do have them too. They're quite rare already because of the Westermarck effect, but that has never been my point.

For me, this is a ideologically a question of libertarianism vs authoritarianism in the first place

Not one of social conservatism vs progressivism (or only in the second place) simply because at the end it's none of my business what two other consenting adults do in the bedroom, regardless of my opinion of what they do.

Do you understand?

[West_Midlander]

Nay on Laki's pro-incest amendment

Well, good to know that you want to observe mutual consentual individuals who have sex because you need to figure out whether they commit incest or not.

For most of the world it's tolerated, maybe Americans are just extremely conservative.

The government has no business in a bedroom.

Whether that be for incest or gay sex whatever, it is the same and it should be the standard.

As i say this is written by someone who if he gets his way would want to criminalize gay sex as well.

Has R said this? Also, this is not relevant to the incest prohibition. It's like saying since you're a communist all things you support should be opposed automatically by all non-communists. It's an ad hominem attack against someone who is not even in this body anymore.

Why do you care so much about what other people people should have sex with.

Do i need to tell my entire sex life to you so that you can judge me.

Are you willing to tell all your sex experiences in detail?

See where i'm going with this.

What stays in a bedroom, remains in a bedroom.

No need for an entire paleoconservative pathetic psychopathic sex bill that would name all 0,0001% occurences.

Should be common sense.

You don't want to do your cousin. Well good for you. Neither would I. But it should not be criminal. Period.

Same for gay sex. I am not physically attracted to gay people, but it's good that people who feel attracted to each other can have sex and marry regardless of opposite gender.

And if you want to evolve to a society where governments survey people and place cams in each others bedroom, well go ahead and defend this bill.

This rant has nothing to do with my most recent comments and if Mr. R supports a ban on gay sex (which is not relevant to the incest debate) I'd like to see evidence of that, but you have failed proof of what you claim.

It seems hypocritical to condemn R on ideological grounds as a radical as you are doing now—discounting his recent support for an attempted independent South since this is not what you are attacking him over—when he was tolerated as Peace Party member for many months, including after this legislation originally passed. In fact, it seemed that you, Scott, and R informally composed Peace leadership for months from late last year to early 2023. Afaik R was nearly omnipresent in private negotiations on behalf of Peace that I was aware of. During this whole time, of course, his ideology never shifted, so I don't know how you can be diametrically opposed to him on non-Unionist ideological grounds while allying him before.

I have no proof of whether R supports a ban on gay sex and you're right that I should not attack him on that.

But i've always expressed - even when the bill was in the senate - opposition to the bill, and i just broadly think that the government has no business in what happens in the bedroom if two adults show mutual consent, regardless of gender, affiliaty etc.

I referred to gay sex because if we would have been transported 20 years back in time, i'm quite sure gay sex would have been included in the bill, and that's no criticism towards R, because it would simply also have passed in the senate. I based that on the opposition on the idea that the government has no business in determining what happens in the bedroom.

You may have moral and ethical concerns about incest, i do have them too. They're quite rare already because of the Westermarck effect, but that has never been my point.

For me, this is a ideologically a question of libertarianism vs authoritarianism in the first place

Not one of social conservatism vs progressivism (or only in the second place) simply because at the end it's none of my business what two other consenting adults do in the bedroom, regardless of my opinion of what they do.

Do you understand?

I believe that putting gay sex and incest on a similar footing is a straw man in this case, in defense of the amendment, but as to the rest of your response, fair enough.

[Utah Neolib]

Nay, let’s not create genetic disorders please.

[Joseph Cao]

Respectfully, I overrule the previous ruling and declare the amendment frivolous due to lacking clear instructions.

I welcome another amendment from the sponsor providing a copy of the relevant bill showing what they want stricken.

For the record I also frown upon such amendments and am fully aware the PPT has leeway to reject amendments that are not sufficiently comprehensible, but it seemed relatively clear what the intent of the amendment was (strike a full section). Westy followed the OSPR as interpreted. But Senators should provide the full text of their proposed amendments regardless, this goes for everyone here.

As to the text of the amendment itself, lol.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Respectfully, I overrule the previous ruling and declare the amendment frivolous due to lacking clear instructions.

I welcome another amendment from the sponsor providing a copy of the relevant bill showing what they want stricken.

As to the text of the amendment itself, lol.

As i've said, my way of reasoning is that the government has no business to determine what happens in a bedroom as long the 2 people are adult humans and mutual consenting individuals.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Maybe it's an american culture thing to go directly so authoritarian and repressive esp. when it comes to sex, but oh well.

Nay, let’s not create genetic disorders please.

Does not happen when children are adopted or not related because of weird family sh**t (divorce etc, new partner, step-sister/step-brother).

Secondly i assume people use protection.

And people can still ignore the law and create babies regardless, it's not like you're all with the cam there checking out what everyone does in their bedroom.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Amendment fails 1-9-0-8. Debate resumes.

[fhtagn]

Motion to table

[Devout Centrist]

Object, I’ll be preparing an amendment to address some of the problems with this bill.

[West_Midlander]

I would support tabling here but I won't second the motion to give Devout Centrist a chance to amend.

[Devout Centrist]

Presenting an amendment part 1:

MAD SCIENTIST PREVENTION ACT

TITLE I: DEFINITIONS

1. Adrenochrome means any chemical compound directly produced by a human or non-human animal from the oxidation of adrenaline or any blood or other product containing such compound.

2. Cryogenic human preservation means the long-term preservation of a human body or human tissue through freezing or heat removal for the intended purpose of resurrecting such body or creating a human clone from such body or tissue at a later date when hypothetical technology is discovered to allow for such resurrection or cloning.

3. Embryonic stem cells means any stem cells produced by a human embryo.

4. External incubation means gestating a living human embryo in an artificial womb until such embryo can be safely implanted in a host or safely delivered as a live baby.

5. Human clone means a human embryo that is substantially genetically identical to a previously born human being.

6. Human embryo means an organism of the species Homo sapiens during the earliest stages of development, from 1 cell up to delivery or fetal death.

7. In vitro fertilization means the artificial creation of a human embryo or fertilized human egg outside of a female human body with the consent of the egg and sperm donors for the intended implantation into a human host body.

8. Prohibited artificial intelligence means any real or theoretical program or software code that:

A. reaches or exceeds the level of human intellectual abilities and is able to apply its abilities to any type of task;

B. achieves self-awareness as found in humans;

C. is capable of animating or controlling a human body; or

D. is or purports to be the uploaded soul, life, consciousness, personality, or memories of a specific human.

9. Prohibited eugenics means reproductive procedures including but not limited to sterilization, castration, vasectomy, fallopian tubal ligation, hysterectomy, and abortion which are carried out for the purpose of reducing or eliminating the future population of specific groups or genetic patterns, groupings, or sequences.

10. Prohibited gain-of-function research means medical or scientific research involving the deliberate editing of the genetic code of a virus, disease, or pathogen for the purpose of increasing the virulty, transmissibility, harmfulness, deadliness, resistance, or persistence of the virus, disease, or pathogen

11. Prohibited human-animal chimera means:

A. a human embryo into which a nonhuman cell or cells (or the component parts thereof) have been introduced to render the embryo's membership in the species Homo sapiens uncertain;

B. a human-animal embryo produced by fertilizing a human egg with nonhuman sperm;

C. a human-animal embryo produced by fertilizing a nonhuman egg with human sperm;

D. an embryo produced by introducing a nonhuman nucleus into a human egg;

E. an embryo produced by introducing a human nucleus into a nonhuman egg;

F  an embryo containing at least haploid sets of chromosomes from both a human and a nonhuman life form;

G. a nonhuman life form engineered such that human gametes develop within the body of a nonhuman life form;

H. a nonhuman life form engineered such that it contains a human brain or a brain derived wholly or predominantly from human neural tissues;

I. a nonhuman life form engineered such that it exhibits human facial features or other bodily morphologies to resemble human features;

J. an embryo produced by mixing human and nonhuman cells, such that human gametes develop within the body of the resultant organism, it contains a human brain or a brain derived wholly or predominantly from human neural tissues, or it exhibits human facial features or other bodily morphologies to resemble human features;

K. a human to whose DNA nonhuman DNA is artificially spliced or grafted; or

L. a human embryo implanted or gestated in a non-human animal.

12. Test tube gestation means the artificial creation of a human embryo or fertilized human egg outside of a female human body.

13. Unknowing test subject means a person upon whom a medical or scientific experiment, test, or case study is being performed without that persons knowledge or consent.

TITLE II: DYSTOPIAN CRIMES

It shall be unlawful for any person in Atlasia to knowingly:

1. create a human clone or produce, advertise, transport, transfer, or receive any product derived from such cloning;

2. create a prohibited human-animal chimera, transfer a human embryo into a nonhuman womb, transfer a nonhuman embryo into a human womb, or transport or receive for any purpose a prohibited human-animal chimera, however this clause does not prohibit research involving the use of transgenic animal models containing human genes or transplantation of human organs, tissues, or cells into recipient animals, if such activities are not prohibited by this act or any other law;

3. create or a human embryo as a result of test tube gestation, except for the purpose of in vitro fertilization with the consent of both parents and an identified host for implantation of the human embryo, however nothing in this clause shall be interpreted as prohibiting the use of external incubation to save an extant human embryo that lacks a human host;

4. produce, advertise, transport, transfer, or receive any human embryo or human fetal tissue or any product derived therefrom however nothing in this clause shall be interpreted as prohibiting the use of external incubation to save an extant human embryo, in vitro fertilization, the burial of a fetus, or scientific research on donated embryonic stem cells resulting from an unintended miscarriage, fetal death, or ectopic pregnancy;

5. conduct, perform, finance, or advertise prohibited eugenics;

6. Advertise cryogenic human preservation services;

7. produce, advertise, transport, transfer, or receive any product derived from human bones, flesh, appendages, skin, organs, blood, or adrenochrome, however nothing in this clause shall be interpreted as prohibiting scientific research on any lawfully obtained human bones, flesh, appendages, skin, organs, stem cells, or blood or the transplantation of any lawfully obtained human organ, stem cells, or blood;

8. prepare, serve, eat, or consume any human bone, flesh, appendage, skin, organ, blood, or adrenochrome obtained in interstate commerce. For purposes of this act food intentionally injected with human DNA shall constitute human flesh;

9. create, finance, transfer, or receive prohibited artificial intelligence;

10. conduct, perform, or finance any medical or scientific research on an unknowing test subject;

11. conduct, perform, or finance any prohibited gain-of-function research; or

12. administer euthanasia to a human embryo, human clone, or prohibited human-animal chimera, except in cases where the animal is suffering from a painful injury or condition for which there is no realistic alternative treatment or realistic chance of recovery.

TITLE III: PUNISHMENTS

1. It shall be a felony to commit any crime enumerated in Title II of this act.

2. A violation of Title II(1),(3), (4), and (12) of this act shall be punishable by imprisonment for not less than 15 years and not more than life and a fine of the greater of $500,000 or the amount equal to twice the amount of the gross pecuniary gain from the violation, if any.

3. A violation of Title II(6) of this act shall be punishable by imprisonment for not less than 5 years and not more than 20 years and a fine of the greater of $100,000.00 or the amount equal to twice the amount of the gross pecuniary gain from the violation, if any.

4. A violation of Title II (5) of this act shall be punishable my imprisonment for not less than 10 years and not more than 25 years and a fine of the greater of $500,000 or the amount equal to twice the amount of the gross pecuniary gain from the violation, if any.

4. A violation of Title II(7) - (8 ) of this act shall be punishable by imprisonment for not less than ten (10) years and not more than twenty (20) years and a fine of the greater of $100,000.00 or the amount equal to twice the amount of the gross pecuniary gain from the violation, if any.

5. A violation of Title II(9) of this act shall be punishable by imprisonment for not more than ten (10) years and a fine of the greater of $100,000.00 or the amount equal to twice the amount of the gross pecuniary gain from the violation, if any.

6. A violation of Title II(10) of this act that does not result in permanent harm to the unknown test subject shall be punishable by imprisonment for not more than five (5) years and a fine of the greater of $10,000.00 or the amount equal to twice the amount of the gross pecuniary gain from the violation, if any.

7. A violation of Title II(10) of this act that results in permanent harm to the unknown test subject shall be punishable by imprisonment for not less than five (5) years and not more than twenty (20) years and a fine of the greater of $100,000.00 or the amount equal to twice the amount of the gross pecuniary gain from the violation, if any.

8. A violation of Title II(11) of this act shall be punishable by imprisonment for not less than five (5) years and not more than ten (10) years and a fine of the greater of $100,000.00 or the amount equal to twice the amount of the gross pecuniary gain from the violation, if any.

9. Any person convicted of crime enumerated in this act shall be ordered to attend an appropriate treatment program or obtain psychiatric or psychological counseling.

10. Any person, including but not limited to any business, institution, or entity that participates in or funds any crime enumerated in this act shall be ineligible to receive federal public funds for no less than five (5) years.

11. No federal public funds shall be expended in the furtherance of any crime enumerated in this act.

TITLE IV: ENACTMENT

1. This act shall take effect 90 days after the passage of this act.

Passed 12-1-1-4 in tbe Atlasian Senate assembled.

- R, PPT

TERMINATE CYBERDYNE ACT

...
5. Any existing law prohibiting discriminatory conduct against certain classes or groups of persons shall not be interpreted as applying to beings in the following categories:

A. Humans who possess non-medically required artificial enhancements that allow such person to perform tasks exceeding human capabilities;

B. Prohibited human-animal chimeras;

C. Non-human animals; and

D. Artificial intelligence.

6. Every school, college, or university receiving federal funds shall be required by July 1, 2023 to adopt a plagiarism policy prohibiting the use of robots, algorithims, or artificial intelligence, including but not limited to ChatGPT, in the completion of any paper, test, assignment, or other student work product.

Passed 10-3-0-5 in the Atlasian Senate assembled.

- R, PPT

[Devout Centrist]

Presenting an amendment part 2:

PREVENTING DEGENERACY ACT

TITLE I: DEFINITIONS

1. Assault Toy means any stuffed animal or children's toy incorporating a sex toy or a BDSM costume.

2. 1. Bestiality means knowingly:
 
A. engaging in sexual contact with a non-human animal;

B. causing another person by force, threat, or intimidation to engage in sexual contact with a non-human animal;

C. advertising, soliciting, importing, transporting, offering, selling, purchasing, financing, or possessing a non-human animal with the intent that the animal be subject to sexual contact with a human;

D. permitting sexual contact with a non-human animal to be conducted on any premises under his or her ownership or control;

E. producing, distributing, publishing, selling, transmitting, financing, advertising, possessing with the intent to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise, or making any attempt to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise an obscene item depicting or purporting to depict a person engaged in sexual contact with a non-human animal; or

F. Traveling in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in or facilitating sexual contact with a non-human animal.

3.2. Ghoulish sex means:

A. Engaging in sexual contact with a dead human body, regardless of the consent of the deceased person prior to death or of his or her estate. For purposes of this definition, knowing participation in group sex activities while a dead human body is present shall be considered ghoulish sex.

B. causing another person by force, threat, or intimidation to engage in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition;

C. permitting sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition to be conducted on any premises under his or her ownership or control;

D. producing, distributing, publishing, selling, transmitting, financing, advertising, possessing with the intent to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise or making any attempt to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise an obscene item depicting or purporting to depict a person engaged in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition;

E. advertising, soliciting, importing, transporting, offering, selling, purchasing, financing, or possessing a dead human body with the intent that the dead human body be used in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition; or

F. Traveling in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in or facilitating sexual contact with a dead human body.

4. 3. Incest means knowingly:

A. Engaging in sexual contact with, either legitimately or illegitimately:

i. his or her ancestor or descendant by blood or adoption, or the spouse thereof;

ii. his or her brother or sister of the whole or half-blood or by adoption, or the spouse thereof; or

iii. his or her uncle, aunt, nephew, or niece of the half or quarter blood or by adoption, or the spouse thereof.

For purposes of this definition, participation in group sex activities while any of the preceding relatives are also contemporaneous participants shall be considered incest;

B. causing another person by force, threat, or intimidation to engage in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition;

C. permitting sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition to be conducted on any premises under his or her ownership or control;

D. producing, distributing, publishing, selling, transmitting, financing, advertising, possessing with the intent to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise, or making any attempt to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise an obscene item depicting or purporting to depict a person engaged in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition.

E. Traveling in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in or facilitating sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition.

5. 4. Infected sexual battery means knowingly:

A. after being diagnosed with a sexually transmitted disease (STD) engaging in sexual behavior that poses a substantial risk of transmission to another person with the intent to transmit the infection to that person without informing them of said STD.

B. causing another person by force, threat, or intimidation to engage in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition, and including cases where all have been informed of the STD;

C. permitting conduct as described in Section A of this definition to be conducted on any premises under his or her ownership or control;

D. producing, distributing, publishing, selling, transmitting, financing, advertising, or possessing with the intent to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise, or making any attempt to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise an obscene item depicting or purporting to depict a person engaged in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition; or

E. Traveling in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in or facilitating sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition.

6. Obscene or dangerous sex toy means:

A. Any assault toy; or

B. any sex doll designed to appear as a non-human animal, including but not limited to a fictitious or mythical animal. This shall not include any equipment utilized in animal husbandry or breeding; or

7. 5. sexual abuse of a minor means, with or without finance consideration:

A. as an adult, engaging in sexual contact with a minor child younger than sixteen (16) years of age or more than five (5) years their junior; or marrying a minor child; or violating the statutory rape or marriage laws of the Region in which such sexual contact or marriage occurs;

B. causing another person by force, threat, or intimidation to engage in sexual contact or marriage as described in Section A of this definition;

C. permitting conduct as described in Section A of this definition to be conducted on any premises under his or her ownership or control;

D. producing, distributing, publishing, selling, transmitting, financing, advertising, or possessing with the intent to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise, or making any attempt to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise an obscene item depicting or purporting to depict a person engaged in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition;

E. Traveling in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in or facilitating sexual contact or marriage as described in Section A of this definition; or

F. soliciting for prostitution a law enforcement officer who is posing as a minor or a person who is assisting law enforcement by posing as a minor, provided such purported minor-status is known to the person so soliciting.

8. 6. sexual invasion of privacy means:

A. knowingly and intentionally creating any videographic or still image record by any means whatsoever of any nonconsenting person if that person is totally nude, clad in undergarments, or in a state of undress so as to expose the genitals, pubic area, buttocks or breast in a restroom, dressing room, locker room, hotel room, motel room, tanning bed, tanning booth, bedroom or other location or the videographic or still image record is created by placing the lens or image-gathering component of the recording device in a position directly beneath or between a person's legs for the purpose of capturing an image of the person's intimate parts or undergarments covering those intimate parts when the intimate parts or undergarments would not otherwise be visible to the general public; and when the circumstances set herein are otherwise such that the person being recorded would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The provisions of this section shall not apply to videographic or still image by law-enforcement officers pursuant to a criminal investigation which is otherwise lawful or correctional or jail officials for security purposes or for investigations of alleged misconduct involving an imprisoned person, or to any sound recording of an oral conversation made as a result of any videotaping or filming authorized by law; or

B. with the intent to coerce, harass, embarrass, or intimidate, maliciously disseminating or selling any videographic or still image created by any means whatsoever that depicts another person who is totally nude, or in a state of undress so as to expose the genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or breast, where such person knows or has reason to know that he or she is not licensed or authorized to disseminate or sell such videographic or still image. For purposes of this section, another person includes but is not limited to a person whose image was used in creating, adapting, or modifying a videographic or still image with the intent to depict an actual person and who is recognizable as an actual person by the person’s face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic.

9. 7. violent sexual deviancy means:

A. engaging in sexual contact with a person who is enslaved, in captivity, non-consensually bound, enslaved, or otherwise restrained, or being subject to nonconsensual violence, torture, or sadomasochistic abuse;

B. causing another person by force, threat, or intimidation to engage in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition;

C. permitting conduct as described in Section A of this definition to be conducted on any premises under his or her ownership or control;

D. producing, distributing, publishing, selling, transmitting, financing, advertising, or possessing with the intent to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise, or making any attempt to produce, distribute, publish, sell, transmit, finance, or advertise an obscene item depicting or purporting to depict a person engaged in sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition or of rape; or

E. Traveling in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in or facilitating sexual contact as described in Section A of this definition.

TITLE II: PROHIBITIONS

1. It shall be unlawful for any person to, upon any federal property or leasehold, over federal electromagnetic spectrum, through the postal service, upon or over the property, facilities, utilities, vehicles, networks, or conveyances of any federally owned or regulated common carrier or internet service provider, or participate or travel in interstate or foreign commerce to:

A. engage in bestiality, ghoulish sex, incest, infected sexual battery, sexual abuse of a minor, sexual invasion of privacy, or violent sexual deviancy;

B. manufacture, import, transport, sell, finance, produce, publish, distribute, advertise, or possess with intent to manufacture, transport, sell, finance, produce, publish, distribute, or advertise any obscene or dangerous sex toy or any obscene item depicting or purporting to depict a person using an obscene or dangerous sex toy.
  
2. It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly finance or attempt or prepare to finance any item or criminal act prohibited by this law or the Community Standards Act. For purposes of this provision, knowingly finance includes but is not limited to processing or facilitating payments by any bank, credit card company, or payment processor to any business, company, or website that hosts any item prohibited by this law or the Community Standards Act if such bank, credit card company, or payment processor has been informed of such hosting by the Attorney General of Atlasia or of any Region in Atlasia, by any court in Atlasia, by any law enforcement officer pursuant to an investigation, or by a sworn affidavit by any person that is easily or readily verifiable.

3. A violation of this act shall be classified as a felony punishable by imprisonment for no less than one (1) and no more than ten (10) years, a fine of no more than $100,000.00, and disgorgement of any profits. Any person convicted of a violation of section 1 of this title shall be required to register as a sex offender an shall be ordered to attend an appropriate treatment program or obtain psychiatric or psychological counseling.

4. Any prohibited item seized pursuant to the enforcement of this law shall be subject to forfeiture.

5. All mentions of "non-consensually" or "by force, threat, or intimidation" shall not apply to situations where said force, threat, intimidation, or lack of consent is consensually simulated between  2 or more non-consanguineous adult participants.

5. 6. This act shall take effect ten (10) days from the date of passage.

Passed 10-8-0-0 in the Atlasian Senate assembled.

- R, PPT

[Coastal Elitist]

I object

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Vote is on Devout's Amendment, scroll up to read it. It is in the Nature of a Substitute.

Nay

[NewYorkExpress]

Abstain

[ChiefFireWaterMike]

Nay

[Devout Centrist]

Aye