[PASSED] Child Pornography Ban

[Normlpeople]

"We would like to address the lack of a defined age of consent. Due to this, any nation against this resolution could easily bypass it. We will be voting against this with a firm NO, but will gladly support a resolution with a defined and reasonable age of consent."

- Krivoukhov Yurievich, Sobrevan Ambassador to the General Assembly

"How does one define a reasonable age of consent for every species in a vast multiverse? You humans aren't the only ones represented you know."

[Sobreva]

"We would like to address the lack of a defined age of consent. Due to this, any nation against this resolution could easily bypass it. We will be voting against this with a firm NO, but will gladly support a resolution with a defined and reasonable age of consent."

- Krivoukhov Yurievich, Sobrevan Ambassador to the General Assembly

"How does one define a reasonable age of consent for every species in a vast multiverse? You humans aren't the only ones represented you know."

"We believe that there must be a universal minimum. There are alternatives, such as delegating the legislating of the age of consent to regional governments. Or addressing, individually, each species' biological clock and making exceptions based on that. We still stand at a firm NO until this is remedied."

[Normlpeople]

"How does one define a reasonable age of consent for every species in a vast multiverse? You humans aren't the only ones represented you know."

"We believe that there must be a universal minimum. There are alternatives, such as delegating the legislating of the age of consent to regional governments. Or addressing, individually, each species' biological clock and making exceptions based on that. We still stand at a firm NO until this is remedied."

OOC: Considering some species live weeks and others thousands of years, with completely different biology's, its not possible to set a 'universal minimum'. At least, not without including a list of every species and an age for each, which isn't possible in a 3500 character limit document. As the previous debate stated, its a loophole that cannot be fixed, but it is no different than not having an age of majority to get out of those laws. Your call though, as this seems well on its way to a pass.

[Sobreva]

"We believe that there must be a universal minimum. There are alternatives, such as delegating the legislating of the age of consent to regional governments. Or addressing, individually, each species' biological clock and making exceptions based on that. We still stand at a firm NO until this is remedied."

OOC: Considering some species live weeks and others thousands of years, with completely different biology's, its not possible to set a 'universal minimum'. At least, not without including a list of every species and an age for each, which isn't possible in a 3500 character limit document. As the previous debate stated, its a loophole that cannot be fixed, but it is no different than not having an age of majority to get out of those laws. Your call though, as this seems well on its way to a pass.

((Yeah, I understand that. Mine's purely RP, votes included, so the GA's character limit isn't taken into account. Although, I never really expected there to be countries/civilizations with different species being affected by World Assembly votes.))

[The Dark Star Republic]

((Yeah, I understand that. Mine's purely RP, votes included, so the GA's character limit isn't taken into account. Although, I never really expected there to be countries/civilizations with different species being affected by World Assembly votes.))

Yes, the mods once tried to ban a proposal about abortion because it didn't apply to "sapient egg-laying species".

Anyway, a non-specific age of consent law might be worth exploring, though anything too specific would face the same problems.

Nations are required to set and enforce a minimum threshold of consent, without discrimination for the nature of the sexual acts or the participants, for consensual activities;

The threshold of consent shall be based on age and mental and physical development.

But as with all loopholes, it's impossible to write a proposal banning people from exploiting loopholes.

[Normlpeople]

Anyway, a non-specific age of consent law might be worth exploring, though anything too specific would face the same problems.

OOC: Well, the SPA does do it somewhat, but the house of cards and all...

[Wrapper]

"We believe that there must be a universal minimum. There are alternatives, such as delegating the legislating of the age of consent to regional governments. Or addressing, individually, each species' biological clock and making exceptions based on that. We still stand at a firm NO until this is remedied."

Ambassador, you are a dou...

Ari notes the glare from the Secretariat.

...dou... Er, due respect, yes, with all due respect, "age of consent" and "age of majority" are already addressed in GAR #16, and to duplicate or contradict that definition could possibly run afoul of the rules here. Now, we understand what you are saying, but understand this. We are a people who can travel to other planets, and have met beings who have grown to full maturity in five earth years; we have met others who even at fifty earth years are still children; there are faerie people, plant people, bear people, and others, all of whom we hope would forgive use using the word "people" in this context, all of whom have representation in this assembly, for whom a universal age of consent makes positively no sense.

How did we address this problem? We did so through the import/export clauses. If you wish to make the age of consent, for example, 18 in your nation, then no one can export pornography depicting 17-year-olds to your nation. Better yet, your nation can even be more restrictive than this resolution, thanks to the final clause, and set the limit higher, to 20, or 21, and enact your own, more restrictive, import/export bans. Or, you can even outlaw pornography entirely, the last clause enables you to do that as well.

What can we do about rogue nations who legislate the age of consent at a prepubescent age? From a legislative standpoint, not much. However, given that such nations would also be circumventing other international laws such as child labor laws, abuse laws, safety laws, etc., they are worthy of our attention in other ways, such as economic embargo. They want to reap the benefits of child exploitation domestically? That would be greatly offset by the loss of international trade.

Hopefully, Ambassador, you understand why, with all the different species represented in this assembly, that a universal age of consent won't work, and that we have all taken enough countermeasures to prevent the exploitation of children by other means.

Honestly, at this point, we don't need your nation's vote; the resolution is passing by what just might be a record-breaking margin. Still, we urge you to change your mind, for the record, and vote in favor of this resolution.

[Sobreva]

"We believe that there must be a universal minimum. There are alternatives, such as delegating the legislating of the age of consent to regional governments. Or addressing, individually, each species' biological clock and making exceptions based on that. We still stand at a firm NO until this is remedied."

-snip-

"We would like to remind the kind ambassador from Wrapper that this is the World Assembly, and not the Assembly of the Universe. Our government did not take into account the oh-so-important species from other planets and solar systems. We would also like you to note that there are still over twelve and a half thousand delegates unaccounted for, with only 2,500 delegates in favor of this resolution."

The ambassador shuffles through a stack of papers, before speaking once more.

"Your input is noted, but our vote stands at a firm no."

[Wrapper]

"We would like to remind the kind ambassador from Wrapper that this is the World Assembly, and not the Assembly of the Universe. Our government did not take into account the oh-so-important species from other planets and solar systems..."

Perhaps you should. You are correct, this is the World Assembly, not the Earth Assembly, and to think the borders of the world match up with the borders of earth is a very closed-minded approach to our dealings here.

[Scow Creek]

While generally supportive, we are troubled by two clauses that are deal-killers for our Kingdom:

1) A computer generated image should not be subject to sweeping world-wide legislation. If the goal is to protect actual children, then actual children should be protected; by including computer-generated images, the legislation now moves away from protecting actual children and towards imposing a morality standard.

2) I object to our nation being held criminally culpable for images of actors who are *above* the age of consent in our Kingdom, but who may be below that age in a more conservative "distributing" nation. If someone is under age in *that* nation, then the perpetrator should be held responsible under *that* nation's law; we, however, should not be liable for receiving something that is totally legal within our own borders. This is a slippery slope that could just as well apply to recreational drugs manufactured elsewhere, but which are legal in our Kingdom.

[Hakio]

While generally supportive, we are troubled by two clauses that are deal-killers for our Kingdom:

1) A computer generated image should not be subject to sweeping world-wide legislation. If the goal is to protect actual children, then actual children should be protected; by including computer-generated images, the legislation now moves away from protecting actual children and towards imposing a morality standard.

The point of that clause was to ban child pornography created by computers that are indistinguishable from actual actors. The problem is that once it's indistinguishable from real life, there is no way to know if they used real kids or not without an investigation. Then, it becomes a huge clusterfuck that is an unnecessary strain on the law enforcement industry to investigate possible child pornography. It may as well be banned also.

2) I object to our nation being held criminally culpable for images of actors who are *above* the age of consent in our Kingdom, but who may be below that age in a more conservative "distributing" nation. If someone is under age in *that* nation, then the perpetrator should be held responsible under *that* nation's law; we, however, should not be liable for receiving something that is totally legal within our own borders. This is a slippery slope that could just as well apply to recreational drugs manufactured elsewhere, but which are legal in our Kingdom.

You're obviously misunderstanding the legislation. Your age of consent laws apply to your nation and if the perpetrator flees to another country they are still held accountable by the international community. No one is forcing any age of consent laws on you.

[Slevvania]

As this resolution falls under the descent nation clause of the world assembly I refuse to vote and sustain this law.

[Pantoufle]

I personally think it should be left up to a member nations' government to determine whether said activity is or isn't legal
Therefore I abstain from voting.
With varying ages of consent this could cause some conflict which is one reason why I am abstaining from this vote.
This also seems to be pushing a religious moral which not all people and nations share. Perhaps a Monetary fine is more suitable if this law does pass then having the nations' criminal justice systems and courts go through the hefty process of investigation of the crime and other policing cost, for nations that are running a bit of a deficit enforcing more things could hinder some countries.
Also what about Nudist/Naturist beaches and other related places, if someone wishes to visit and record/photograph the people in these Nudist/Naturist groups (Which sometimes children are part of/in) would they be in violation of this law if a naturist/nudist child was in a recording or photograph?
Also if these pornographic images/videos have a child portrayed as a computer generated character or a hand drawn character then there should be no problem as it isn't an actual child and merely a drawing aided either by computer or hand drawn.

[Mundiferrum]

I personally think it should be left up to a member nations' government to determine whether said activity is or isn't legal
Therefore I abstain from voting.

NatSov arguments are generally not valid here.
NatSov: National Sovereignty. They're not considered valid because, essentially, they're debasing the international nature of the Assembly. If you believe you should be so independent of legislative changes impounded upon you by the Assembly for the mere belief that you should be left to your own devices, then why not simply leave?

With varying ages of consent this could cause some conflict which is one reason why I am abstaining from this vote.

I believe the ambassador from Wrapper addressed this [six posts] before.

This also seems to be pushing a religious moral which not all people and nations share. Perhaps a Monetary fine is more suitable if this law does pass then having the nations' criminal justice systems and courts go through the hefty process of investigation of the crime and other policing cost, for nations that are running a bit of a deficit enforcing more things could hinder some countries.

Again, NatSov argument. Also, child pornography is not a negative solely on religious grounds; an example for a cause against the sexualization of youths below the age of consent that is not religious is that it can lead to major abuses both mental and physical upon said youths.

Also what about Nudist/Naturist beaches and other related places, if someone wishes to visit and record/photograph the people in these Nudist/Naturist groups (Which sometimes children are part of/in) would they be in violation of this law if a naturist/nudist child was in a recording or photograph?
Also if these pornographic images/videos have a child portrayed as a computer generated character or a hand drawn character then there should be no problem as it isn't an actual child and merely a drawing aided either by computer or hand drawn.

Read the part of the proposal on sexual purposes.

[Hakio]

I honestly have very little respect for any ambassador that chooses to vote against this proposal.

[The Dark Star Republic]

I honestly have very little respect for any ambassador that chooses to vote against this proposal. :eyebrow:

The WA should be a forum for all views. We cannot hector to people to respect multiple species, tech levels, forms of government, planets, timeframes, and of course, theories of gravity, and then at the same time not respect a diversity of opinions.

We were planning on abstaining, but just out of annoyance at this little display of intellectual arrogance, we'll vote against, with apologies to the author.

[Mundiferrum]

I honestly have very little respect for any ambassador that chooses to vote against this proposal.

The WA should be a forum for all views. We cannot hector to people to respect multiple species, tech levels, forms of government, planets, timeframes, and of course, theories of gravity, and then at the same time not respect a diversity of opinions.

We were planning on abstaining, but just out of annoyance at this little display of intellectual arrogance, we'll vote against, with apologies to the author.

Why were you planning on abstaining?
Just a question, not gonna pester you for being whatever or anything.

[Hakio]

I honestly have very little respect for any ambassador that chooses to vote against this proposal.

The WA should be a forum for all views. We cannot hector to people to respect multiple species, tech levels, forms of government, planets, timeframes, and of course, theories of gravity, and then at the same time not respect a diversity of opinions.

We were planning on abstaining, but just out of annoyance at this little display of intellectual arrogance, we'll vote against, with apologies to the author.

Well then thank you for supporting the rights of pedophiles to spite me, what an incredibly logical thing to do.

[The Dark Star Republic]

The WA should be a forum for all views. We cannot hector to people to respect multiple species, tech levels, forms of government, planets, timeframes, and of course, theories of gravity, and then at the same time not respect a diversity of opinions.

We were planning on abstaining, but just out of annoyance at this little display of intellectual arrogance, we'll vote against, with apologies to the author.

Why were you planning on abstaining?
Just a question, not gonna pester you for being whatever or anything.

I wasn't quite satisfied with the resolution, but I wasn't very involved in the drafting process because the objections being raised ("the rights of travellers") were specious drivel. So I would have felt guilty voting against.

[Hakio]

Why were you planning on abstaining?
Just a question, not gonna pester you for being whatever or anything.

I wasn't quite satisfied with the resolution, but I wasn't very involved in the drafting process because the objections being raised ("the rights of travellers") were specious drivel. So I would have felt guilty voting against.

Don't you think you're voters will be a little suspicious of you choosing to keep child pornography legal on an international level just to spite another ambassador not involved with the drafting process? I don't know about you, but I would not vote for that person. Then again, we're getting off topic.

[Pantoufle]

I personally think it should be left up to a member nations' government to determine whether said activity is or isn't legal
Therefore I abstain from voting.

NatSov arguments are generally not valid here.
NatSov: National Sovereignty. They're not considered valid because, essentially, they're debasing the international nature of the Assembly. If you believe you should be so independent of legislative changes impounded upon you by the Assembly for the mere belief that you should be left to your own devices, then why not simply leave?

With varying ages of consent this could cause some conflict which is one reason why I am abstaining from this vote.

I believe the ambassador from Wrapper addressed this [six posts] before.

This also seems to be pushing a religious moral which not all people and nations share. Perhaps a Monetary fine is more suitable if this law does pass then having the nations' criminal justice systems and courts go through the hefty process of investigation of the crime and other policing cost, for nations that are running a bit of a deficit enforcing more things could hinder some countries.

Again, NatSov argument. Also, child pornography is not a negative solely on religious grounds; an example for a cause against the sexualization of youths below the age of consent that is not religious is that it can lead to major abuses both mental and physical upon said youths.

Also what about Nudist/Naturist beaches and other related places, if someone wishes to visit and record/photograph the people in these Nudist/Naturist groups (Which sometimes children are part of/in) would they be in violation of this law if a naturist/nudist child was in a recording or photograph?
Also if these pornographic images/videos have a child portrayed as a computer generated character or a hand drawn character then there should be no problem as it isn't an actual child and merely a drawing aided either by computer or hand drawn.

Read the part of the proposal on sexual purposes.

I'm still going to abstain from voting, and I have re-read the proposal.
I justified my points because it would make sense for some nations to have exceptions in otherwise general law. (Similar to the EU)
But as it seems I might be thinking "NatSov" again.

[Otaku Stratus]

2 problems. same problems i always have
a) nudity is not sexual activity under any circumstances. nudity is never inappropriate in any circumstance.
b) banning the FILMING of an act is a truly insane thing to do. Ban the ACT. Encourage criminals to record their crimes so you can prosecute them more easily. Nobody restricts the footage of other types of crimes being committed do they? We broadcast it on the news even.

[The Eternal Kawaii]

In the Name of the Eternal Kawaii, may the Cute One be praised

"We would like to address the lack of a defined age of consent. Due to this, any nation against this resolution could easily bypass it. We will be voting against this with a firm NO, but will gladly support a resolution with a defined and reasonable age of consent."

- Krivoukhov Yurievich, Sobrevan Ambassador to the General Assembly

"How does one define a reasonable age of consent for every species in a vast multiverse? You humans aren't the only ones represented you know."

The recent passage of GAR #299, "Legal Competence", should answer that question. Clearly a person who is not legally competent cannot consent to appear in pornographic material.

[Wrapper]

This also seems to be pushing a religious moral which not all people and nations share.

WHAT??? Seriously? Please point me to anything in this resolution that gives the mere hint of pushing a religious anything on anyone.

[Wrapper]

We were planning on abstaining, but just out of annoyance at this little display of intellectual arrogance, we'll vote against, with apologies to the author.

OOC: I would rather you voted against it for some other petty reason, like, "you spelled 'discreet' wrong! Bastard!" than some fucked up shit like this. Apology my ass, vote on the resolution, not on what someone else who didn't have a hand in this thinks or does.