NationStates Jolt Archive

Abolish Marriage

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Skredtch


NOTICING the controversy over the definition of marriage,

REALIZING that such controversy may never be resolved,

ASSERTING that marriage is a matter best handled privately, without government intervention,

It is hereby resolved that the institution of marriage will be removed from the hands of the government and returned to the people.

ARTICLE I: Marriage will cease to be a legal status in all member nations.

ARTICLE II: Any benefits or penalties accorded to or imposed upon married or unmarried individuals will be removed.

ARTICLE III: Any legal requirements for marriage will be rescinded.

ARTICLE IV: Any laws regarding legal guardianship of minors will be revised to account for the absence of marriage as a legal status.

ARTICLE V: No government agency will prevent any person or body from performing any marriage ceremony for one or more consenting adults, unless that ceremony also concerns one or more non-consenting adults or one or more minors.

ARTICLE VI: No government agency will compel any person or body to perform any marriage ceremony unwillingly.

ARTICLE VII: No government agency will prevent any number of persons from cohabitating in a single residence, unless the number of inhabitants exceeds the safe number of occupants as defined by agencies designated to respond to emergencies including but not limited to fires, floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, and other natural disasters.

This is the first proposal that the Republic of Skredtch has submitted. For that reason, we would appreciate any advice that other nations would be willing to dispense concerning acceptable and effective methods of advertising the proposal in order to reach quorum.

I beleive that this proposal is illegal due to both the "Gay Rights" and "Definition of Marriage" resolutions.

I beleive that this proposal is illegal due to both the "Gay Rights" and "Definition of Marriage" resolutions.
I second that. ;)
Besides, this is absolutely absurd.

This is a waste of the UNs time.

I beleive that this proposal is illegal due to both the "Gay Rights" and "Definition of Marriage" resolutions.
That's largely a matter of interpretation.

This proposal does not necessarily conflict with the marriage clause in "Gay Rights". Gay marriage is protected and endorsed in that no government agency is permitted to prevent it.

Unfortunately, "Definition of Marriage" does not appear to have been added to the list of past UN resolutions at this time, and the exact text of the resolution does not appear to be available at the moment.

Although this proposal may appear to conflict with the wording of one or more past resolutions, it is in accord with the spirit of those resolutions. Specifically, it is intended to allow marriages of all kinds, by preventing the government from interfering with them.

This is a waste of the UNs time.

That argument did not prevent the passage of past resolutions regarding the institution of marriage, even when it was better supported than in your presentation of it.

I would love the idea of this resolution. But you'll have to repeal two or three other ones, all redundantly granting homosexual marriage in an impenetrable weave of defense, before it can be legal.

However, it would be legal to abolish all heterosexual or polygamist marriage.

Ah, yes. One of the Furcadians.

NOTICING the controversy over the definition of marriage,

REALIZING that such controversy may never be resolved,

It was solved the simple way. People passed it.

ASSERTING that marriage is a matter best handled privately, without government intervention,

It is hereby resolved that the institution of marriage will be removed from the hands of the government and returned to the people.

Can't as long as there are UN resolutions. I must make sure those are enforced.

ARTICLE I: Marriage will cease to be a legal status in all member nations.

ARTICLE II: Any benefits or penalties accorded to or imposed upon married or unmarried individuals will be removed.

ARTICLE III: Any legal requirements for marriage will be rescinded.

Illegal as far as I am concerned. That is my interpretation, but it's good enough for me.

ARTICLE IV: Any laws regarding legal guardianship of minors will be revised to account for the absence of marriage as a legal status.

ARTICLE V: No government agency will prevent any person or body from performing any marriage ceremony for one or more consenting adults, unless that ceremony also concerns one or more non-consenting adults or one or more minors.

I have enough laws as it is, and this contradicts 1-3 by making a government legislate it while not allowing a government to legislate it.

ARTICLE VI: No government agency will compel any person or body to perform any marriage ceremony unwillingly.

ARTICLE VII: No government agency will prevent any number of persons from cohabitating in a single residence, unless the number of inhabitants exceeds the safe number of occupants as defined by agencies designated to respond to emergencies including but not limited to fires, floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, and other natural disasters.

Not bad.

That's largely a matter of interpretation.

This proposal does not necessarily conflict with the marriage clause in "Gay Rights". Gay marriage is protected and endorsed in that no government agency is permitted to prevent it.

Unfortunately, "Definition of Marriage" does not appear to have been added to the list of past UN resolutions at this time, and the exact text of the resolution does not appear to be available at the moment.

This resolution’s wording is now available and I respectfully request the honourable member of Skredtch review it in light of their proposal. I must concur with Mr Flibble from Flibbleites that your proposal is illegal in light of this resolution and “Gay Rights”.

Respectfully
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
Office of UN Relations, Dept for Foreign Affairs
HM Government of Telidia

I like the idea, hell, I brought it up, but it needs some work, you need to repeal first

How about... no.


This is quite riddiculous.

This is a good start, but it doesn't fit the requirements. Keeping trying. You'll find the right issue.

It's certainly better than hearing people constantly bitch about giving gays equal rights.

It's certainly better than hearing people constantly bitch about giving gays equal rights.

The original Ban Marriage proposal was written as a way to make a point about people arguing over Gay Rights, so I consider all copies of it to be the same thing.