NATION

PASSWORD

[DRAFT] Conscientious Objection

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

[DRAFT] Conscientious Objection

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sat Jan 09, 2010 6:34 am

Key notes: This draft is a new version from the original version that we attempted during the Jolt days, and indeed the Lulu-Hilde Berlin days. Some bits were left behind due to the legislation that have been passed between then and now, if you spot anything that is redundant or now possible by any resolution or repeal let me know. Thanks!

And yes, we welcome ideas and feedback. ;) This is Chalotte Ryberg's reply to the general topic of...

Conscientious Objection

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Mild | Proposed by: Charlotte Ryberg

The World Assembly,

OBSERVING that certain member states mandate compulsory military service to: defend their state from enemy attack, or teach basic and vital skills to the population in peacetime.

NOTING that civilians may object to compulsory military service because of reasons deriving from principles and reasons of conscience, including profound convictions, arising from religious, moral, ethical, humanitarian or similar motives;

ADMITTING that not all conscientious objectors object to all forms of compulsory service, just as long as the alternative service are of a non-military and civilian nature.

APPLAUDING member states that accept claims of conscientious objection to be valid without questioning;

NEVERTHELESS seeking to promote the right to conscientious objection in all member states, anyway;

Hereby:

DEFINES, for this resolution,
• A “Conscientious objector” as a person who refuses to serve in the armed forces or bear arms on moral or religious grounds;
• "Combative military duties", as a role which involves the bearing of arms, or the operation of military vessels or weapons, in order to cause harm to other people, mainly of the opposing nation;

1. DECLARES that all persons eligible for compulsory military service shall be offered the right to declare conscientious objection;

2. REQUIRES member states to inform persons eligible for compulsory military service of the right to conscientious objection and the procedures for obtaining such status, before they begin their service;

3. REQUIRES member states to either:
a) Accept claims of conscientious objection at face value, or alternatively;
b) Establish fair and impartial board(s) of enquiry to assess such claims;

4. MANDATES that member states will not force conscientious objectors to serve in combative military duties;

5. PROVIDES for Member states to mandate conscientious objectors to perform alternative service which is: congruent with the beliefs of the objector, of a non-combative, non-military and non-punitive nature. Alternatively, member states may accept the claim and allow for the conscientious objector to unconditionally resume civilian lives;

6. MANDATES that member states will not subject conscientious objectors to any form of punishment or imprisonment, for failure to perform, or choosing alternative service over, combative military service.

Submitted for a good grilling,
Last edited by Charlotte Ryberg on Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:43 am, edited 9 times in total.

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18574
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grays Harbor » Sat Jan 09, 2010 6:44 am

Image

There are some valid points made, however, our opinion of this has not changed significantly in that we believe this is a matter better left to the individual nations.

Military service does not automatically mean "infantry". There ar many many support positions such as medical, clerical, religion, supply, transportation, mechanical, etc etc, which do not require combat. Many nations have specific non-combat arms and services. Not all nations even have conscription, which I believe you did mention, but it seems unfair to single those that do out for legislation. Should you, or any nation for that matter, care to include this draft in their own national law, that is entirely up to them. However, mandating compliance to a single standard for everybody regardless of cultural, political and civic deifferences if stretching things a bit too far.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Bergnovinaia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7314
Founded: Jul 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bergnovinaia » Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:20 am

As I said in my "weaker" version of this, I really think everything about this thread is good becuase it is more general in its spectrum.
I am pursuing my undergraduate degree from Texas A&M University in Psychology and Spanish. My goal in life is to be a marriage and family counselor. If you have questions about me or my life, just ask!

My girlfriend and I blog about Christian & general marriage, relationship, and dating advice!

NS member since 2009. WA Resolution Author (mostly all repealed), NS sports fanatic.

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4386
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Father Knows Best State

Postby A mean old man » Sat Jan 09, 2010 5:14 pm

What right do certain members of the WA think they have to start playing around with how I employ my soldiers?
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia ← please forget

User avatar
Sanctaria
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7922
Founded: Sep 12, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Sanctaria » Fri Feb 19, 2010 12:54 pm

Honoured Ambassador for Charlotte Ryberg,

The Divine Republic of Sanctaria supports this draft resolution. The idea of forcing people into Military Service is sickening to this representitive. However, we do understand that for reasons of security, a draft is sometimes necessary. This, I feel, is an adequate and well thought out compromise; it enable a draft to be in place and also enables those who have an objection to war, on the grounds outlined, to opt out of said draft.

We would like to say well done on such a well written report and you have our support.

Regards,

Yasminé Pontif
Minister for the World Assembly at the Department of Foreign Affairs
Divine Federation of Sanctaria

Ideological Bulwark #258

Dr. Bethany Greer CMD, Sanctarian Ambassador to the World Assembly
Author of:
GA#109 GA#133 GA#176 GA#201 GA#222 GA#297
GA#590 (Co)
Frisbeeteria wrote:Do people not realize that moderators can tell when someone is wanking?

Luna Amore wrote:Sanc is always watching. Ever vigilant.

Auralia wrote:Your condescending attitude is remarkably annoying.

User avatar
Poree
Envoy
 
Posts: 263
Founded: Feb 07, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Poree » Fri Feb 19, 2010 3:20 pm

While the Empire of Poree already offers Civil Service options in the manditory 18 months every citizen must give. The idea of dictating to all WA members how they run their military service seems overly controling. We will not be supporting this proposal at this time.
Last edited by Poree on Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sarah Woodman
Representative of The Empire of Poree
Regional Delegate

User avatar
Des-Bal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32801
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Des-Bal » Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:18 pm

It is the highest honor for a citizen to fight for their nation and we are very happy with our current policy of allowing individuals to object to service and then allowing them to be set on fire in the public square.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

User avatar
Enn
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1228
Founded: Jan 26, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Enn » Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:26 pm

To conscientiously object is to acknowledge that the government has the right to conscript - you are simply objecting in your case, not objecting to the greater evil. I cannot accept any proposal that would specifically grant governments the right to conscript their citizens.

Stephanie Fulton, of Enn
I know what gay science is.
Reploid Productions wrote:The World Assembly as a whole terrifies me!
Pythagosaurus wrote:You are seriously deluded about the technical competence of the average human.

User avatar
Quelesh
Minister
 
Posts: 2942
Founded: Jun 09, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Quelesh » Sat Feb 20, 2010 1:36 am

OOC: Perhaps I should draft a WA resolution outlawing necromancy? ;)
"I hate mankind, for I think myself one of the best of them, and I know how bad I am." - Samuel Johnson

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." - George Bernard Shaw
Political Compass | Economic Left/Right: -7.75 | Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -10.00

User avatar
Bears Armed
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21479
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Sat Feb 20, 2010 8:04 am

Quelesh wrote:OOC: Perhaps I should draft a WA resolution outlawing necromancy? ;)

"Considering that Dicey Riley, (wrongfully) President-for-life of Ardchoille and currently that nation's ambassador here, has herself publicly practiced that Art on one memorable occasion... Hr'rmm..."

^_^
The Confrederated Clans (and other Confrederated Bodys) of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Population = just under 20 million. Economy = only Thriving. Average Life expectancy = c.60 years. If the nation is classified as 'Anarchy' there still is a [strictly limited] national government... and those aren't "biker gangs", they're traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies', generally respected rather than feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152, 1474, 1521.

User avatar
Des-Bal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32801
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Des-Bal » Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:05 am

A mean old man wrote:What right do certain members of the WA think they have to start playing around with how I employ my soldiers?

The same right they think they have to tell me who I can and cannot kidnap and force to work for me.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

User avatar
Skibereen
Minister
 
Posts: 2724
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Skibereen » Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:18 am

Gentlemen,
while this act would effect the policies of Skibereen with regards to national service, and while indeed mirrors our current policies...we must in good faith present an intent to vote against this type of legislation. Our lack of presence in the General assembly has prevented us from establishing a voting track record however it will be noted that infringing on the rights of States to self rule without imminent threat to the welfare of their population(or any other) will never be deemed an acceptable course of
action.

This piece of legislation is directly that, an infringement on self rule. Our morality we are aware is not the only morality.

I yield.
argumentum ad logicam, seriously think about it.

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
James Madison
First in line for the pie in the sky

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sat Feb 20, 2010 4:55 pm

Honoured ambassadors,

I understand that many nations want compulsory military service but to be honest not every civilian is going to want to pull a trigger for moral reasons. This is the justification for this draft. Even so, it is possible to employ them to fill the jobs that other conscripts had left behind while the war is ongoing: A alternative service which is congruent with the beliefs of the objector, of a non-combatant and non-punitive nature could be anything but fighting. Okay, maybe I need a little tweak at that.

Yours etc,
Last edited by Charlotte Ryberg on Sat Feb 20, 2010 4:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Unibot
Senator
 
Posts: 4292
Founded: May 25, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Unibot » Sat Feb 20, 2010 6:30 pm

Pascal grabbed the ambassador for Psychokinetic Bacteria, whispering into his ear "this is an intervention."

As he hauled him through a window, Pascal screamed "NEVER COME BACK HERE AGAIN!", watching the delegate hopelessly trying to fly in a drug influenced disinhibition.

Whiping the dirt of his hands, the Unibotian ambassador was pleased with himself, he had always been the defenstrated, never the defenstrator. That was fun.
Last edited by Unibot on Sat Feb 20, 2010 6:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ezioria
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 3
Founded: Feb 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Ezioria » Sat Feb 20, 2010 8:51 pm

Ezioria supports this CO's will be placed in non-combat postions like medics,cooks etc

User avatar
Sanctaria
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7922
Founded: Sep 12, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Sanctaria » Sat Feb 20, 2010 8:55 pm

Ezioria wrote:Ezioria supports this CO's will be placed in non-combat postions like medics,cooks etc


This Ambassador believes that this could be an adequate compromise to the more conservative among us. However, we would note that in times of war, those CO's wishing to be medics would have a very limitied time to train and, in our view, it would be hazardous having non trained COs in the capacity of a medic.

Perhaps cook and postal union officers or something like tha.

Yasminé Pontif
Minister for the World Assembly at the Department of Foreign Affairs
The Divine Republic of Sanctaria
Divine Federation of Sanctaria

Ideological Bulwark #258

Dr. Bethany Greer CMD, Sanctarian Ambassador to the World Assembly
Author of:
GA#109 GA#133 GA#176 GA#201 GA#222 GA#297
GA#590 (Co)
Frisbeeteria wrote:Do people not realize that moderators can tell when someone is wanking?

Luna Amore wrote:Sanc is always watching. Ever vigilant.

Auralia wrote:Your condescending attitude is remarkably annoying.

User avatar
Poree
Envoy
 
Posts: 263
Founded: Feb 07, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Poree » Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:20 am

>>2. REQUIRES member states to ensure that persons liable for compulsory military service or are serving in the military
>>already are informed of the right to conscientious objection at any time, and the procedures for obtaining such status;

Can this be edited in such a way that the objection needs to be at the time they are asked to serve in the military?

The way it is now, a person could use "conscientious objection" as an excuse to get out of assignments they do not like once they have served for a time. If you have a conscientious objection to service in th military, it should come out at the start, not when you are re-assigned to bathroom clean up and then "find" that you now have some kind of "conscientious objection" to service in the military.
Sarah Woodman
Representative of The Empire of Poree
Regional Delegate

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:49 am

Poree wrote:>>2. REQUIRES member states to ensure that persons liable for compulsory military service or are serving in the military
>>already are informed of the right to conscientious objection at any time, and the procedures for obtaining such status;

Can this be edited in such a way that the objection needs to be at the time they are asked to serve in the military?

The way it is now, a person could use "conscientious objection" as an excuse to get out of assignments they do not like once they have served for a time. If you have a conscientious objection to service in th military, it should come out at the start, not when you are re-assigned to bathroom clean up and then "find" that you now have some kind of "conscientious objection" to service in the military.
The honoured ambassador to Charlotte Ryberg does have a heart for those already in the military. What about those who have gone through very traumatic experiences? Oh, okay, what do you think about this following revision, honoured ambassador?

2. REQUIRES member states to ensure that persons liable for compulsory military service or are already serving in active combat duty are informed of the right to conscientious objection at any time, and the procedures for obtaining such status;

For consideration,

User avatar
Mousebumples
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 8623
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Mousebumples » Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:37 am

Charlotte Ryberg wrote:The honoured ambassador to Charlotte Ryberg does have a heart for those already in the military. What about those who have gone through very traumatic experiences?

If they had experienced a very traumatic experience, they may be able to claim medical/psychiatric leave. While a traumatic experience may make an individual gun shy for a period as they recover, it is unlikely that they would suddenly develop a conscientious objection. And, again, I mirror the arguments of the above ambassador regarding concerns over having to suddenly fill the shoes of, for example, a military leader who suddenly develops a "conscientious objection." Leaders are already lost in war time due to the inherent violence/deaths involved. While we can respect the intentions of the ambassador from Charlotte Ryberg, we are uncertain that this proposal is appropriate as written.

Yours,
Leader of the Mouse-a-rific Mousetastic Moderator Mousedom of Mousebumples
Past WA Delegate for Europeia & Monkey Island
Proud Member of UNOG
I'm an "adorably marvelous NatSov" - Mallorea and Riva
GA Resolutions (sorted by category) | Why Repeal? | Reppy's Sig Workshop

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sun Feb 21, 2010 7:54 am

Revised Section 2 to: REQUIRES member states to ensure that persons liable for compulsory military service are informed of the right to conscientious objection at any time, and the procedures for obtaining such status;

Submitted for consideration,

User avatar
Poree
Envoy
 
Posts: 263
Founded: Feb 07, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Poree » Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:26 am

I believe the problem is the phrase "at any time". This leaves the loophole way to open for abuse by those who want an excuse to get out of their service.

How about:

2. REQUIRES member states to ensure that persons liable for compulsory military service are informed of the right to conscientious objection and the procedures for obtaining such status before they begin their service.

This leaves the Nations free to stipulate when and where a person could make this declaration and yet not force Nations to offer it at "any time".
Sarah Woodman
Representative of The Empire of Poree
Regional Delegate

User avatar
Freeoplis
Diplomat
 
Posts: 551
Founded: Dec 18, 2009
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Freeoplis » Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:09 pm

We object to such a proposal. In the interests of national security we wish to leave the option of conscription open for the foreseeable future.
The Republic of Freeoplis
Region of Absolution

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:36 pm

Poree wrote:I believe the problem is the phrase "at any time". This leaves the loophole way to open for abuse by those who want an excuse to get out of their service.

How about:

2. REQUIRES member states to ensure that persons liable for compulsory military service are informed of the right to conscientious objection and the procedures for obtaining such status before they begin their service.

This leaves the Nations free to stipulate when and where a person could make this declaration and yet not force Nations to offer it at "any time".

I guess that addressed a remnant of the previous revision. Resolved.

User avatar
Sanctaria
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7922
Founded: Sep 12, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Sanctaria » Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:54 pm

Mousebumples wrote:
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:The honoured ambassador to Charlotte Ryberg does have a heart for those already in the military. What about those who have gone through very traumatic experiences?

If they had experienced a very traumatic experience, they may be able to claim medical/psychiatric leave. While a traumatic experience may make an individual gun shy for a period as they recover, it is unlikely that they would suddenly develop a conscientious objection. And, again, I mirror the arguments of the above ambassador regarding concerns over having to suddenly fill the shoes of, for example, a military leader who suddenly develops a "conscientious objection." Leaders are already lost in war time due to the inherent violence/deaths involved. While we can respect the intentions of the ambassador from Charlotte Ryberg, we are uncertain that this proposal is appropriate as written.

Yours,


Those conscripted are usually not made Generals or the like. As such, those already in a leadership capacity most likely joined the war effort for their own interest. And the likliehood of a leader developing co, as i've shortened it, is very low. Unless they have some sort of traumatic injury thereby creating a epiphany, which as you said allows them to claim leave of some sort.

Yours etc.,

Image
Yasminé Pontif
Minister for the World Assembly at the Department of Foreign Affairs
The Divine Republic of Sanctaria
Divine Federation of Sanctaria

Ideological Bulwark #258

Dr. Bethany Greer CMD, Sanctarian Ambassador to the World Assembly
Author of:
GA#109 GA#133 GA#176 GA#201 GA#222 GA#297
GA#590 (Co)
Frisbeeteria wrote:Do people not realize that moderators can tell when someone is wanking?

Luna Amore wrote:Sanc is always watching. Ever vigilant.

Auralia wrote:Your condescending attitude is remarkably annoying.

User avatar
Poree
Envoy
 
Posts: 263
Founded: Feb 07, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Poree » Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:10 pm

The Empire of Poree has shifted their thinking and now can support this with both approval and votes if it comes up for vote.
Sarah Woodman
Representative of The Empire of Poree
Regional Delegate

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads