NationStates Jolt Archive

"Defining Marraige"

So that every country is happy, we give each country a shell of marriage

CLAUSE I - Definitions
{Marriage--A group of living beings who are joined together by a marriage document;

Marriage Document--Standalone Document which explicitly states that 2 or more groups are to be conjoined into marriage. A person may have multiple marriage documents. The government itself is not allowed to own one.

Married--To be one group that is conjoined in a Marriage Document.

Conjoining--The Event of a marriage document being passed. Happens to the group getting conjoined together legally;

Divorce--V.--The event of ending a marriage document. If there are two parties left, and one dies, this happens automatically. The one still living will take the place of the marriage name in any other marriages that creature is still in and has that marriage name.

Remarriage--V.--The event where a marriage document is amended to add and/or remove parties from the marriage.}

CLAUSE II - Unamendable Parts
{ A marriage between a group of creatures must have a marriage document. That document shows that they are married. The time a marriage document is made is known as a Conjoining and the time it ends is known as a divorce. A remarriage happens when a new party wants to enter the marriage or a party wants to exit it. If there is only one person left in a marriage (or none) than a divorce is what happens. In each marriage contract, a set of laws for the creatures of the marriage can be set, and if so, the punishments for not following them are decided inside the contract.}

CLAUSE III - Amendables
{
A. If not wanted, a country can choose to not have divorce and/or remarriage.
B. A country can choose how many of each creature/gender/ect. may be allowed in an individual marriage.
C. A country can choose the maximum amount of creautes can be in a marriage contract.
D. A country can choose how many marriage contracts one creature can be in at one time.
E. The country chooses who can make a marriage happen.
F. A country can choose who puts the laws in the contract part of the marriage document.
G. A country can choose to make individual laws about what happens during a divorce or remarriage by either making it part of every contract, in certain contracts, or by passing laws for marriage.
H. If a nation decides it doesn't want marriage, it can decide to not have it.}

CLAUSE IV
{At any time, a new resolution may make it so that certain parts of Clause II may be added or restricted. No resolution can force only humans to allowed to be married, gays to not be allowed to marry, or forcing something to be done inside the contract of the marriage document. Divorce and Remarriage must be allowed to be chosen upon by the countries at their own will.}


Well, I changed a lot from two nights ago. I got rid of marriage name, and eliminated clause 5. I also got rid of the parts of speech. There is already a blocker on this subject unfortunately. Otherwise, I would have sent this in on Saturday. It is now more or less, a joke proposal that can technically be followed by anybody by the rules of the resolution. I would like to repeal/better but I don't really see a reason too. If you want to, you can help me make this joke proposal better for the future.

I did cut out tons of "fillers" which basically made sure certain things happened. Lots of it was redundant literally. Here is what some of the old things said:

Your country can choose to eliminate divorce except for by death.
Your country can choose to eliminate remarriage except for by death.
Your country can choose to eliminate marriage altogether.
ect.

Havvy

That's an amazingly long and thorough draft..but...

Um...there's kinda already a resolution on this that would prevent yours from going through.

For your reading pleasure: The Marriage Protection Act (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11973206&postcount=183)

Uhhg. From what I can tell, that is pure national sovereignly, but that's not always the best. The writers are right. It is hard. I'd wonder how they would like to see something that actually does that! Oh well. Do you still see anything that is possibly wrong and shouldn't be used?

It's still excellent practice. I spent a good portion of the day doing it. *Neglects Region and Other Site*

No, it's the best compromise I could come up with after spending weeks trying to write a fair new right to marriage proposal, and failing miserably. Trying to give all citizens a right to marry, while at the same time attempting to take all nations differences and cultures into account, and making allowences for that, was just too hard to do.

I'm not a big fan of national sovereignty, and writing that blocker was really hard for me. I think it was the best thing to do however, because the UN really doesn't need to be involved in the marriage laws of its nations. Even leftist at heart me (though I'm playing Witchcliff as a centrist nation) had to accept that, finally.

Uhhg. From what I can tell, that is pure national sovereignly, but that's not always the best. The writers are right. It is hard. I'd wonder how they would like to see something that actually does that! Oh well. Do you still see anything that is possibly wrong and shouldn't be used?

It's still excellent practice. I spent a good portion of the day doing it. *Neglects Region and Other Site*

We just wanted to make absolutely sure the representative understood what the honorable representative of HotRodia meant. The proposal contradicts "The Marriage Protection Act" and is illegal. If he submitted it, it would be deleted.

Now, just a couple of technical things for the representative to consider when he drafts proposals in the future....

How long is the proposal? There's a length limit of 3500 characters (including spaces). This one looked as though it might be bumping up against that.

Why did you enclose things in "{}"? We've never seen that done before and wondered if there was a reason for it.

It's not necessary to state what parts of speech words are. We can figure that out, honest. ;)

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

3500 Word Limit. Wow, that makes it a lot harder to make anything useful. I'm going to edit out clause 5 and get rid of the parts of speech. I merely used the {s to show definite clauses. Are custom styles not aloud? It's how all acts and shells made by the Havaco Party are written. I'm not going to submit this, but it still makes a great shell. I made an English shell. I'll try turning that into a script which will give you a clear and cut description of what your marriage laws are like. Then a person can insert them into their NS Wiki page and people can see your countries look on marriage.

3500 Word Limit.
Not word, character.

Yes yes, I know. Character. It's hard to get anything useful done with that limit.

I'm sure there's plenty of Resolution writers who would disagree.