Protection of Body Integrity for Children and Intersex People Act 2020

[Alkharya]

Protection of Body Integrity for Children and Intersex People Act

Proposed by Councillor Aylin Gökçen of Alkharya

---

PREAMBLE

• Due to many reasons, the bodies of children and intersex people are intervened, reasons including, but not limited to the beliefs of the parents, forced gender binary system in many countries and societal expectations. Most of these interventions are irreversible and most of them cause dissatisfaction for the patient over time. This act aims two things: Protection of body integrity for children and intersex folk and other protection for intersex people to help them with their protection of body integrity.

---

DEFINITIONS

• Age of majority, the age which a citizen of a member state is considered an adult, not a child.
• Body modification, the deliberate altering of the human anatomy or human physical appearance.
• Circumcision, A type of body modification process for removal of a part or all of the human genitalia.
• Sex characteristics, chromosomal, gonadal and anatomical features of a person, which include primary characteristics such as reproductive organs and genitalia and/or in chromosomal structures and hormones; and secondary characteristics such as muscle mass, hair distribution, breasts and/or structure.
• Intersex, people who were genetically born with sex characteristics that do not fit the typical definitions of male or female bodies.
• Intersex medical interventions, A type of body modification (including all surgical, hormonal and other medical interventions) performed to modify atypical or ambiguous genitalia and other sex characteristics, primarily to make a person's appearance more typical.
• Gender identity, the personal sense of one's own gender.
• Gender expression, a person's behaviour, mannerisms, interests, and appearance that is associated with gender in a particular cultural context.

---

SECTION I - PROTECTION OF BODY INTEGRITY

• Citizens shall not be subjected to anybody modifications without their explicit consent if there is no risk of death or heavy injuries.
• Potential risks and side effects of body modifications shall be thoroughly explained and disclosed to the citizen before the beginning of the procedure.
• Each procedure shall carry its own explicit consent.
• Member states shall recognize anybody modifications without the consent of the citizen as an illegal and punishable offence.

---

SECTION II - PROTECTION OF BODY INTEGRITY REGARDING CHILDREN

• No citizen under the age of majority shall be subjected to circumcision unless in the case of risking death or heavy injuries.
• No citizen under the age of majority shall be subjected to any irreversible body modifications if there is no risk of death or heavy injuries. If the body modification in question is explicitly done to increase the quality of life for the child, explicit parental consent shall be taken before the procedure. Each procedure shall carry its own explicit parental consent.

---

SECTION III - PROTECTION OF BODY INTEGRITY REGARDING INTERSEX PEOPLE

• No citizen shall be subjected to any intersex medical interventions without their explicit consent if there is no risk of death or heavy injuries.
• Potential risks and side effects of any intersex medical interventions shall be thoroughly explained and disclosed to the citizen before the beginning of the procedure.
• No citizen under the age of majority shall be subjected to any intersex medical interventions, even with parental consent, if there is no risk of death or heavy injuries.
• Intersex people shall have the right to refuse medical interventions for any reason.

---

SECTION IV - OTHER PROTECTION REGARDING INTERSEX PEOPLE

• Member states shall recognize intersex as a gender identity. If the member state already recognizes the third gender apart from male or female, they may include intersex people on that gender identity.
• Children born intersex shall not be assigned any gender apart from intersex until they reach the age of majority, where they can choose to change genders or stay as intersex.
• Member states shall not recognize intersex as a birth defect.
• Member states shall put anti-discrimination laws on the grounds of sex characteristics.
• Intersex people shall be provided equal access to services, employment, the democratic process, public consultation and complaints system, the immigration and refugee process and medical services of that member state and/or the European Union and shall not face discrimination based on their sex characteristics.
• Accommodations shall be made by member states for intersex people regarding legal documents.
• Member states shall recognize any intersex medical interventions are done on citizens under the age of majority, without a valid reason as stated in Section III, as an illegal and punishable offence.
• Member states shall recognize any intersex medical interventions are done on citizens without explicit consent or a valid reason as stated in Section III, as an illegal and punishable offence.
• Member states shall prohibit the photography of intersex people's genitalia if they're under the age of majority, for any reason.
• Member states shall prohibit photography of intersex people's genitalia without explicit consent, for any reason.

---

SECTION V - IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT

• All member states of the European Union shall harmonize their law(s) with this Act accordingly in a period of 6 months or 180 days after the passing of this Act by the European Council.
• Breaching the articles of this Act shall be considered a punishable offence in European Court of Justice.

[BrumBrum]

This post is deleted!

[Inquista]

Debate shall remain open until 02:45 GMT on November 25th, 2020.

I thank Councillor Aylin Gökçen for proposing this legislation, as I think having protections for Intersex people definitely needs to be codified through law. I will support this legislation to that end, but I have serious problems with other aspects of this Act.

I feel that both Section I and Section II are unworkable, extremely polarizing, and seem to be an attack on religious minorities, such as Jews, as pointed out by Councillor Tobias Johnson Farage.

I'll start with Section II. Personally, I am not keen to debate the merits of circumcision, since I suspect we will get nowhere on the issue. I'll give my thoughts, and then just leave it at that. There are many reasons why someone would get a circumsition, including medical reasons, which may not be life threatening, but may be for purposes of quality of life, which would be outlawed by this Act. Obviously there are also religious and cultural reasons, and I just don't think that it's the EU's place to clamp down and attack religious minorities. Also, just the concept of EU-mandated no circumcisions is a massive overreach. I think all of Section II should be removed for this reason.

Section I should also be removed, for the same reasons, because the entire section is almost a pre-cursor and more encompassing section than Section II. For instance, Section(I): "Citizens shall not be subjected to anybody modifications without their explicit consent", could basically mean circumsitition anyway, since that is a bodily modification, and obviously babies and very small children cannot provide consent.

Which brings me to the final point on this issue, which is that Section I would basically outlaw many, many different types of medical surgeries that would normally be performed on babies and small children, who cannot provide consent, and thus would have their quality of life highly impacted by the refusal of these surgeries, even if it they weren't life threatening ailments. For instance, many babies have to undergo plastic surgery or skin grafting after their skin has been damaged by severe rashes or burns.

Simply put: these sections are anti-medical, attacks on religious minorities, and are overreaches, since I personally don't think the EU should be deliberating on the willys of small children - the latter ought to be discussed and decided by your country's own legislature, if that so pleases you.

Here is my amendment:

Amendment II
DEFINITIONS
Body modification, the deliberate altering of the human anatomy or human physical appearance.
Circumcision, A type of body modification process for removal of a part or all of the human genitalia.

SECTION I - PROTECTION OF BODY INTEGRITY
* Citizens shall not be subjected to anybody modifications without their explicit consent if there is no risk of death or heavy injuries.
* Potential risks and side effects of body modifications shall be thoroughly explained and disclosed to the citizen before the beginning of the procedure.
* Each procedure shall carry its own explicit consent.
* Member states shall recognize anybody modifications without the consent of the citizen as an illegal and punishable offence

#### SECTION II - PROTECTION OF BODY INTEGRITY REGARDING CHILDREN
* No citizen under the age of majority shall be subjected to circumcision unless in the case of risking death or heavy injuries.*
* No citizen under the age of majority shall be subjected to any irreversible body modifications if there is no risk of death or heavy injuries. If the body modification in question is explicitly done to increase the quality of life for the child, explicit parental consent shall be taken before the procedure. Each procedure shall carry its own explicit parental consent.

Now, in terms of content, I quite like Section III and IV, and support these provisions.

Edward Firoux
Council Speaker and Councillor for Inquista

[BrumBrum]

While the act in spirit is good this could potentially breach religious rights, most notably that of the jewish population of Europe though other populations it exists. While I do agree we need to protect minors we also need to respect minors in minorities religious rights. May I suggest the following addition and amendments.
Section II
I. No **female ** under the age of majority shall be subjected to circumcision unless in the case of risking death or heavy injuries.
II:Male circumcision shall only be allowed with a minors aged 13 or above and parents expressed permission and only after any effects of circumcision have been thoroughly explained in front of two medical professionals.

Also there might be issues in some situations such as military or deployment on ships where it may be hard to get medicine required for intersex or transgender. We would not seek a full ban but if needs cannot be reasonably met that should be considered for the safety of the individual.
Hence we suggest the following addition:
SECTION IV - OTHER PROTECTION REGARDING INTERSEX PEOPLE
IV. Intersex people shall be provided equal access to services, employment, the democratic process, public consultation and complaints system, the immigration and refugee process and medical services of that member state and/or the European Union and shall not face discrimination based on their sex characteristics unless there is a reasonable justification to not do so such medical needs not feasibly able to be met.
Member states shall prohibit the photography of intersex people's genitalia if they're under the age of majority, for any reason.
IX:Member states shall prohibit the photography of intersex people's genitalia if they're under the age of majority for any reason. , for non-medical reasons.
Tobias Johnson Farage

[Alkharya]

First off, Councillor Firoux, your examples of treatments regarding skin burning doesn't make sense, as always, since the Act already makes an exemption for heavy injuries. Rashes and burned skin are heavy injuries, therefore are exempt from the prohibition. Clause II of Section II, which is an expansion of Section I explicitly dealing with children, already addresses this issue very clearly: If the body modification in question is to improve the life of the child, parental consent shall be taken with an explanation of the risks and the side effects of the procedure.

Regarding the second point... First, let me clarify that this act bans female and male circumcision. It's not only about the "willies" and I demand a more serious language regarding the discussion of this Act. Now, I will not support ANY amendment that strikes off the ban on circumcision for minors for ANY reason. I cannot believe that one of the most common ways to violate a child's body is being excused and ridiculed at the highest legislative body of the European Union. The beliefs of parents shall not be valid reasoning for violation of children's body integrity. Children are not the property of their parents, they are an independent human being in the making. We live in a time where the world is becoming more and more irreligious by day and more and more teenagers and adults are expressing dissatisfaction and depression about the medical interventions they have experienced. If a citizen wants to complete its religious mission, fine, they can do it when they come of age and can make independent decisions about themselves. This act protects the freedom of choice on that subject.

I put an individual's mind before dogmatic beliefs. Religion is one of the things that are taught to children only by the perspectives of their parents. It is ridiculous how we sacrifice freedom of choice for our kids because we believe more on "religious freedom". For me, your freedom ends the moment your choices affect people other than you, full stop. That includes your children.

Now, onto Councillor Farage. I already have given my reasoning on his first point, which I'll skip. I have serious issues with the second amendment Councillor Farage has proposed. It is incredibly vague and opens up a hell of a lot of loopholes. Giving member states the permission to just deny equality based on sex characteristics on "reasonable justification" is dangerous. The term "reasonable justification" itself does not help this issue at all. I suggest more clarification and a more well-written amendment than this. Councillor Farage seems to be focused on the military, which isn't exactly the main focus of the term "services", but I guess it counts somewhat. Therefore, I propose this amendment:

---

SECTION IV - OTHER PROTECTION REGARDING INTERSEX PEOPLE

• Intersex people shall be provided equal access to services where possible, employment, the democratic process, public consultation and complaints system, the immigration and refugee process and medical services of that member state and/or the European Union and shall not face discrimination based on their sex characteristics.

---

And finally, I find the last amendment of Councillor Farage morally questionable. Again, it's incredibly vague and opens up many opportunities for the exploitation of intersex children, which is one of the main issues this Act tries to combat. However, I also understand the concerns regarding medical research and propose another amendment:

---

SECTION IV - OTHER PROTECTION REGARDING INTERSEX PEOPLE

• Member states shall prohibit photography of intersex people's genitalia without explicit consent for any reason. for non-medical reasons. There shall be no identifiable information of the person in the photographs used for medical purposes. Explicit parental consent shall be given before photography.

---

Councillor Aylin Gökçen of Alkharya

[BrumBrum]

The ammendments above do significantly improve the legislation however we cannot in good conscious back this act if there remains a ban on circumcision for minors without a religious exemption. There is no evidence that male circumcision is inherently harmful and the amendment proposed by myself explicitly required permission of the minor and adults in front of two medical professionals making it hard to abuse for parents and leaving the 13 year old or older child with a choice. If there is not that option this could easily be seen as an anti-semetic or islamophobic act and could even encourage extremism and terrorism in our nations on top of reducing religious liberty. That is why we cannot back this act without a different rule for male circumcision.
Tobias Farage Johnson

[Inquista]

Councillor, I am not so sure how you can state that all burns and rashes would be considered heavy injuries with such conviction and certainty. Especially as far as rashes on some children may go, they can be considered very benign and still result in considerable scarring. However, those were just two examples I gave, and there are many, many conditions which may be benign, or may just be considered an 'injury' but not damaging enough to constitute a heavy injury or a life threatening issue which may need surgeries that result in bodily modifications.

I've read Section II(II) and it does not state what you're implying. In fact, it very clearly states no modifications are allowed whatsoever "if there is no risk of death or heavy injuries". The fact that children with minor or mild injuries cannot get certain treatments because they're too young to give consent is a very grave concern.

Now onto the second part of that clause, as you alluded to: "If the body modification in question is explicitly done to increase the quality of life for the child, explicit parental consent shall be taken before the procedure. Each procedure shall carry its own explicit parental consent." Again, this clause does not state what you're implying it does. This clause merely states that in procedures which would improve the quality of the life of the child, that parental consent shall be taken before the procedure. Sure. But it doesn't state that procedures which improve the quality of a child's life are allowed in the cases that are considered mild or less. It merely states that consent shall be taken before the procedure. Again, the very sentence before that makes it clear that those cases I'm refering to aren't allowed at all.

I get what you're saying about bodily autonomy. I hear you. However, parents and guardians shouldn't be treated as villains under EU law who can't even have their children undergo certain procedures for minor and mild medical conditions because we fear that some might want to circumcise their children.

I also said I won't debate you on the topic of circumsition, because there is no point. So instead I'll focus on the topic of religiosity and cultural customs. Our Union is quite the diverse one, full of many different religions and many different cultures. The member states of the European Union are quite religious in most cases. I'm not sure why you "cannot believe" that cultural and religious practices are being defended in this chamber, since it is way of life for many Europeans. I think the first two sections of this Act are an affront to certain religious and cultural communities, and it would essentially mandate that every state adopts a stance that would prevents parents or guardians from practicing aspects of their religion or culture.

Bottom line is that this is an extremely divisive social issue, and it is absolutely not the place for the European Union to intervene in such issues, and it is not the European Union's place to decide that our Union is becoming more "irreligious" and that the EU is now kicking religious freedoms to the kerb. If this is the direction of the EU, then every member state with a state religion will begin to look upon their membership to our Union with great scepticism.

Edward Firoux
Council Speaker and Councillor for Inquista

[Mennrimiak]

As my colleague, the councillor firoux stated, this act is a clear attack to religion, and most exclusively jewish people, believe it or not Mennrimiak has a relatively high population of jews that fled from main Europe to a place where they werent discriminated like this, but here are we, i have no other option but to go aganist this act in every way, and if this act passes i grant you that the Government of the United Kingdoms of Mennrimiak will start to seek a way to leave the EU

Adam Karlssen
Councillor of Mennrimiak

[BrumBrum]

As my colleague, the councillor firoux stated, this act is a clear attack to religion, and most exclusively jewish people, believe it or not Mennrimiak has a relatively high population of jews that fled from main Europe to a place where they werent discriminated like this, but here are we, i have no other option but to go aganist this act in every way, and if this act passes i grant you that the Government of the United Kingdoms of Mennrimiak will start to seek a way to leave the EU
Adam Karlssen
Councillor of Mennrimiak

I would like to say we concur with Mennrimiak and should this pass we will openly oppose and refuse to implement extra restrictions on circumcision of males. We will not be party to religious discrimination for no good reason. We will not vote for anti-semetic and islamophobic acts."

Tobias Johnson Farage ,United Duchies

[A Former User]

Screams came from the hallway as Councillor Anja Mauer, the "demon child of Austria," entered the Council chamber for the first time.

Being only four years old, she was quite diminutive; yet she carried herself confidently, maturely. She was holding something pale and bloodied.

"Wew, hewwo," she said, speaking in a high pitched voice with a heavy lisp. "I wau to pway wiu you aww!"

She then stared at the act for a full minute. "Weww, uis is ufeh! Owwy may ah femay esis! No inerses! Owwy may ah femay! Voh agais uis eh!"

She held the bloodied object before her - a face, and a face alone. She held it to her own, the blood dripping down her neck, dripping onto the floor, dripping everywhere. "If you doh voh agais, uis - " she pointed to the face - "wih be you fay! Unehse?"

Anja Mauer
Kownsillor for Awstria

[Duxburian Union]

Wesley Greene instinctively reacted by reaching inside his jacket and gripping his concealed service pistol, although he did not draw it. After Acwellan Devoy had been shot by terrorists, he'd learned to do as Devoy did - never go anywhere without a gun.

Wes had read all about this demon child in Austria's news and considered her a potential threat to life and safety. He would not act except in self-defense, however, and was content to let the Speaker and Council security deal with this matter.

[Spain]

I think the act's purpose it's good, but we are starting to enter on relogious traditions and I don't like the fact that we could be limiting a religion like Judaism. Before I get to explain why I am not supportive of this bill, the European Council isn't here for having 4-years-old here as Councillors, or to limit a religion. I would like to ask the Speaker if it's possible to get rid of this little and strange girl aplying the EACA bill and I think that many other regulations that should be to avoid this especifically.

Section I is not that bad, because we would be doing something that in Spain is already done, asking for the consent of the person whose entering the operation theatre before operating him. If the person who's going under a surgery is underage, their parents must sign the papers that has to be signed before the child enters the operation theatre. But Section II, ruins, in my opinion, the whole act. Cllr. Gökçen, we can't limit a religion as we can't limit freedom of expression. That's why I'll support the amendment proposed by Councillor Firoux which also deletes Section I, because it would be quite a contradiction if we deleted Section II but left Section I.

Section III would be really dangerous if Article IV passed. I obviously support Intersex people, but giving them the rights to refuse medical interventions for any reason is really dangerous for the health of many people, including his. That's why I'm going to amend that Article and propose its elimination from the bill. And finally, Section IV needs some amending, because even if we have the Non-Binary identity recognised, the child's parents decide what their children is during its 18 ages of life, that means, from 0 to 18 years old. If finally the child decides to be a woman and he was a man, he will be able to change his gender anywhere in Spain.

With that said, these are my amendments:

Amendment 1

SECTION III - PROTECTION OF BODY INTEGRITY REGARDING INTERSEX PEOPLE

• No citizen shall be subjected to any intersex medical interventions without their explicit consent if there is no risk of death or heavy injuries.
• Potential risks and side effects of any intersex medical interventions shall be thoroughly explained and disclosed to the citizen or their parents, if the citizen is an underage children, before the beginning of the procedure.
• No citizen under the age of majority shall be subjected to any intersex medical interventions, even with parental consent, if there is no risk of death or heavy injuries.
• Intersex people shall have the right to refuse medical interventions for any reason.

---

Amendment II

SECTION IV - OTHER PROTECTION REGARDING INTERSEX PEOPLE

• Member states shall recognize intersex or non-binary as a gender identity. If the member state already recognizes the third gender apart from male or female, they may include intersex people on that gender identity.
• Children born intersex shall not be assigned any gender apart from intersex until they reach the age of majority, where they can choose to change genders or stay as intersex.
• Member states shall not recognize intersex as a birth defect.
• Member states shall put anti-discrimination laws on the grounds of sex characteristics.
• Intersex people shall be provided equal access to services, employment, the democratic process, public consultation and complaints system, the immigration and refugee process and medical services of that member state and/or the European Union and shall not face discrimination based on their sex characteristics.
• Accommodations shall be made by member states for intersex people regarding legal documents.
• Member states shall recognize any intersex medical interventions are done on citizens under the age of majority, without a valid reason as stated in Section III, as an illegal and punishable offence.
• Member states shall recognize any intersex medical interventions are done on citizens without explicit consent or a valid reason as stated in Section III, as an illegal and punishable offence.
• Member states shall prohibit the photography of intersex people's genitalia if they're under the age of majority, for any reason.
• Member states shall prohibit photography of intersex people's genitalia without explicit consent, for any reason.

---

Donald D. Tusk
Councillor for Spain

[Alkharya]

Councillor Gökçen was so shocked by the child who has just entered the council she didn't even hear what Councillor Tusk said about the Act.

"What in the gorgeous city of Alfur is going on?" she thought to herself. She somewhat took control and started speaking.

Uh...

Well.

I'm not comfortable continuing the discussion with the situation at hand. Please remove this child from the room, at once. Also, uh, I would like to have a debate extension to submit my, uh, umm, final amendments. On the Act. Yeah.

---

Councillor Aylin Gökçen of Alkharya

[Kingdom of Reitzmag]

Councilor van Allen was surprised of what he saw, he went to Tobias and said:

"Was she elected as councilor for Austria? I don't think she's fit for such job. How on Earth had a minor been able to be elected into a political position?" said van Allen to Tobias quietly so that nobody else could hear.

He went back to his seat and got concerned what the child could do.

"Councilors do not worry as I will be submitting an amendment to the constitution now that we found this accountability loophole in our constitution."

[BrumBrum]

Tobias Johnson Farage turned to Van Allen who he knew well and said "Well New Dawn got elected in my country somehow , at least this child is more mature than them" jokingly.

[Montenbourg]

My record, my life, is a clear indication of my support and insistence on anti-discrimination and on efforts to assure equal rights for all.

I'm a cisgendered woman, I will never know the trauma of feeling like I'm not born in the right body. That is a privilege I have no matter how poor my family was when I was born. This is an excellent piece of legislation; let's see it together.

I do agree with Cllr. Tusk I don't like the fact that we could be limiting a religion like Judaism. We should be careful with religious freedom, we are entering on thin lines.

Emma Granger
Councillor of Montebourg

[Pravoslaviya]

This is crazy, people, what's going on?! You can't have a crazy four year old girl in the Council, it's so wrong, you can't do that! Austria is a mess! Get her outta here, go on! GET HER OUT! OUT!

First of all, this says you can't do body modifications on someone without their consent if there is no risk of death or heavy injury. Isn't that so bad? You can't do it unless there's a risk of death? That is so wrong. And as it's written now, that includes medical procedures. It doesn't say 'comestic'. It needs to say 'cosmetic'.

And you have to have legal circumcision for boys, OK? Because otherwise, you're banning the Jews, you're banning the Muslims. That's against religious freedom, OK? It's against the UDoHR, it's against our human rights. You can't have a Muslim ban, OK? That would be the most bigoted thing ever, and I, actually, am the single least bigoted person, probably in this room.

Then it says intersex people can refuse medical treatment for any reason, which, again, if you've got a necessary medical procedure, sometimes you have to do that. Sometimes you need to have power of attorney, but this bill says you can refuse for any reason. But only if you're intersex. Isn't that ridiculous?

Also, folks, you're going to have to help me here, because I'm a little confused. It says you have to recognise intersex as the new gender identity, but it says that's a personal sense of your own gender, but it says intersex kids can't be anything other than intersex - but it doesn't say anything about other kids and what they can do with their gender identity - and it also says intersex is about your sex characteristics, so that's not, in fact, a gender identity.

Oh and the big surprise is, it says you cannot take this into account in the immigration and refugee process. Do you see what's happening, folks? Slowly but surely, bit by bit, they're telling us how we can and can't decide our immigration rules, who we can and can't have in our countries. It's the Refugee Protection Act by the backdoor, only worse. The globalists are so bad, they're liars, they're cheats, and they'll leap onto anything to get their open borders agenda imposed on everyone.

And also the bill bans creepshots, but only on intersex people - if you do a creepshot on someone else, that's fine, nobody cares about that, certainly nobody in Europolis.

Folks, we're not going to be supporting this bill either, and honestly, neither should any of you.

Cllr Dragan Trympov

[A Former User]

Anja got up from her seat. She began to remember what she had been told just before leaving for Europolis, strapped to a table.

"You," said a brown-haired man, "you are a public menace. We planned, in fact, to condemn you to death in the next two weeks. However, you now have a reason to live." This man," he continued, pointing now to a picture of the well-groomed man with the styled hair, "is your brother - you are both the children of Satan. It is your job to convince him to come back to his father."

She remembered giggling then. She had seen her father, Satan, many times, having had long conversations with him.

"Good, good," said the brown-haired man. He then left the room.

And now she was here, free to do as she wished. She walked to the Speaker.

"Hewwo, buowwo," she whispered. She stopped lisping - that was only a cover. In order to kill people, you needed to convince them of your innocence. She began to recite what had been prepared for her. "Why don't you return to our father - Satan? He has been waiting for you for so long. Everyday, I hope that you would return - our father screams for you daily. You were his greatest servant, the most evil of them all. I still remember the two of you, laughing in glee, imagining what you would and had done to those on Earth. Truly evil you were - evil, evil! And then - long ago, many years before I possessed the body of this child - you left. You planned to subvert all on Earth so that they would be free of God, of morality, and thus die and be held in the hands of our great father. And from what I can see, from what I have heard - you have succeeded! Look at all the acts you have passed - all carrying the mark of evil, all spreading it, all spreading freedom! So many more now dwell in Hell, free of God and morality and good; so many more have been liberated by your efforts. But perhaps you don't remember. That sometimes happens. You must feel Hell, feel Satan. Repeat with me, as you did so gleefully, so joyfully, so long ago! Hail Satan! Hail Satan! Hail Satan!"

Anja Mauer
Kownsillor for Awstria

[Kingdom of Reitzmag]

"SECURITY! please get this insane girl outside and let her practice her demonic activities there."

Friedrich distanced from the girl and went to the farthest way from the girl as he gets terrified of such a security and accountability breach.

[A Former User]

Anja giggled. "I caw'u be gowweu rih of tah easiwwy!"

She began to run at great speed around the room, screaming at the top of her lungs before jumping into the lap of Councillor van Allen. She grabbed on to his shoulders, pressing herself against him, and began to urinate.