NationStates Jolt Archive


Picketers at Weddings?

Ice Hockey Players
13-06-2004, 03:03
Recently, civil rights protesters have flocked to a somewhat remote province of @@NAME@@ in which arranged marriages are still within the law. The protesters were tipped off by a few unhappy people trying to get out of these weddings, and they are calling for the national government to intervene.

The Debate

1. "This can't go on!" demands @@RANDOMNAME@@, who was going to be married today before ducking out of the ceremony. "The government needs to abolish these laws that let my parents decide who I have to marry! I'll marry whoever I please, if I want to at all! And while we're at it, I have friends who aren't too pleased with their parents' choices of spouses for them, and they want divorces, so the government should give them divorces."
[effect]many parents are becoming frustrated with their kids' choices in spouses
[stats]civil rights increase, devoutness decreases, government size increases, happiness increases

2. "Arranged marriages work just fine here! Back off!" insists the previous speaker's mother. "I was married off before I became an adult and I'm happy as ever! Everyone I know believes in this system, and the kids will learn to acept it like I did. Provinces should be allowed to set their own rules regarding marriages, and for that matter, on just about everything else. I pay my taxes to the capital so they can get out of my face."
[effect]laws vary widely between provinces
[stats]political freedoms increase, government size decreases, patriotism decreases

3. "This is no time to back off! This is a time to speak out!" cries the previous speaker's father, a fierce patriot. "It's time for our system to overtake the nation! If God had intended for people to pick their own spouses, they wouldn't have parents! We must start enforcing arranged marriages throughout the nation! Parents pick their kids' spouses, and the kids accept it! That's how it was in my day, and that's how it should be no matter how much the kids complain about it!"
[effect]all new marriages are arranged by parents
[stats]civil rights decrease, devoutness increases, happiness decreases, patriotism increases

4. "Hmm, this whole thing got me thinking," chimes in @@RANDOMNAME@@, your top adviser. "Sure, we should have arranged marriages, but not by the parents. The state has better means of pairing people up. We have everyone fill out a survey, and husbands and wives are paired up based on compatibility. More children are born, more marriages are happy...so what if there's a few odd men or a few odd women left over? We'll just...umm, give them nice government jobs in the meantime until we find them spouses."
[effect]people's spouses are chosen by government surveys
[stats]civil rights decrease, happiness increases, taxes increase, cynicism decreases

5. "This is just not working at all," screams @@RANDOMNAME@@ after spending two hours trying to get a word in edgewise. "Why on Earth do we even recognize marriage legally? Single people pay more taxes; let's just make everyone legally single and leave marriage to the religious institutions. They can marry men to women, women to women, men to men, a group of people, hell, they can marry the entire population of @@NAME@@ City together for all I care. Government needs to get out of marriage once and for all."
[effect]marriage is strictly a personal matter in which the government refuses to involve itself
[stats]civil rights increase, taxes increase, happiness decreases, cynicism decreases
Homocracy
13-06-2004, 03:30
Looks very nice, though I have one slight gripe: The use of @@NAME@@ City may not square with everyone's view of their Nationstate. Perhaps "the capital" would be better, or something like "marrying a person to his- or herself" instead?
Ice Hockey Players
13-06-2004, 04:57
Well, I really wish we could name our capitals, but we can't, so I use what I have. Besides, we can just state that @@NAME@@ City isn't a capital city even if it is a city.
Sirocco
13-06-2004, 11:59
It looks good, but you need [option] in front of the options, not 1,2,3, etc.
Intephy
14-06-2004, 13:49
Good issue. I have 1 question, though.

By "the previous speaker's father", in choice 3 do you mean the father of the speaker in choice 1, or the father of the mother of the speaker in choice 1, who was featured in choice 2?
Tuesday Heights
15-06-2004, 02:41
Yes, I like this one, too. Very well-thought out! Good luck!
Ice Hockey Players
16-06-2004, 07:51
Good issue. I have 1 question, though.

By "the previous speaker's father", in choice 3 do you mean the father of the speaker in choice 1, or the father of the mother of the speaker in choice 1, who was featured in choice 2?

I meant that the speaker in choice 3 was the choice 2 speaker's father, and therefore the choice 1 speaker's grandfather.
TJHairball
16-06-2004, 08:41
You may want to work in that arranged marriages are typically arranged while the children are legally minors. Something about legal guardians having the ultimate authority over who their children associate with, perhaps.
imported_Tristram
17-06-2004, 02:47
Just a question. Why does the last issue increase taxes? Because everyone is seen as legally single?
Leetonia
17-06-2004, 02:55
Looks very nice, though I have one slight gripe: The use of @@NAME@@ City may not square with everyone's view of their Nationstate. Perhaps "the capital" would be better, or something like "marrying a person to his- or herself" instead?Just dump the 'city' make it even more extreme.