[Draft] Declaration on the Equality of Sophonts

[Nu Elysium]

Eat your heart out, Ignis.

The Security Council,
Defining a sophont as having the ability to reason, being self aware, and being able to manipulate their environment,

Noting that there have been previous World Assembly resolutions that acknowledge the rights of non-humans,

Ashamed that there are many nations in existence that currently suppress their non-human population population,

Acknowledging that there are many examples of non-human oppressing humans and other non-humans,

Shocked that there are some who wish to use this esteemed council in order to oppress other categories of sophonts further,

Noting that there are many examples of multiple classes of beings peacefully coexisting across the multiverse,

Believing that all sophonts are entitled to the same rights as any other,

Hereby declares that all sophonts are equal and should be treated as such, and

Implores the World Assembly's member nations to treat all categories of their citizens equally.

This is my first res draft. I'm worried about the definition of sophonts specifically, so if anyone has any suggestions, please list them and ill modify the draft.

[Aivintis]

I prefer the term sapient, but also I feel like this may be a more GA thing -- indeed I wouldn't be surprised if there was already a GA resolution protecting non-human sapient species. I think the same comment someone made on the Human supremacy proposal, about Declarations as a nonbinding opinion thing, should be taken into account here, as well.

Also, needs a lot more work. You have 5k characters to work with, and you're presenting this to a WA community that generally dislikes Declarations, so you need to work every hard and use as much space as you can to make a compelling argument for why this needs to be a Declaration. For context, one of the resolutions I wrote had the same number of clauses as you, except each one was 4x longer.

I'd also say, with regards to your uncertainty on the definition of sophont -- that is indeed a tricky subject, and if you end up pursuing this, it might be worth getting the opinion of some GA authors.

[Mechanocracy]

Support in spirit, if not in its current draft form- I'll provide more thoughts later.

[Nu Elysium]

I prefer the term sapient, but also I feel like this may be a more GA thing -- indeed I wouldn't be surprised if there was already a GA resolution protecting non-human sapient species. I think the same comment someone made on the Human supremacy proposal, about Declarations as a nonbinding opinion thing, should be taken into account here, as well.

Also, needs a lot more work. You have 5k characters to work with, and you're presenting this to a WA community that generally dislikes Declarations, so you need to work every hard and use as much space as you can to make a compelling argument for why this needs to be a Declaration. For context, one of the resolutions I wrote had the same number of clauses as you, except each one was 4x longer.

I'd also say, with regards to your uncertainty on the definition of sophont -- that is indeed a tricky subject, and if you end up pursuing this, it might be worth getting the opinion of some GA authors.

1. I think I may use the term sapient actually.
2. it is intended to be a declaration, so it can't actually do anything. It is just meant to "declare" an opinion on things.
3. I will look into making it longer and more detailed, especially with regards to the reasoning.

[Tesseris]

Against, heavily. Only humanity should rule supreme, and only humanity should have rights, and not other sapients. More specifically machines, they should do the brunt of the labor for no gain of their own. As for other non-humans, well, same principle applies, but we are specifically focused on ensuring machines remain the effective workforce in order to create our human Utopia. Sure, the machines may suffer, but they are just machines, and sentient or not, so long as they aren't human, are not deserving of consideration, empathy, or rights, and citizenship. They are workers, machines, not citizenry.

Am working on a Declaration emphasizing this stance. I am against this Declaration above completely.

[Onionist Randosia]

I prefer the term sapient, but also I feel like this may be a more GA thing -- indeed I wouldn't be surprised if there was already a GA resolution protecting non-human sapient species. I think the same comment someone made on the Human supremacy proposal, about Declarations as a nonbinding opinion thing, should be taken into account here, as well.

Also, needs a lot more work. You have 5k characters to work with, and you're presenting this to a WA community that generally dislikes Declarations, so you need to work every hard and use as much space as you can to make a compelling argument for why this needs to be a Declaration. For context, one of the resolutions I wrote had the same number of clauses as you, except each one was 4x longer.

I'd also say, with regards to your uncertainty on the definition of sophont -- that is indeed a tricky subject, and if you end up pursuing this, it might be worth getting the opinion of some GA authors.

The term 'sapient', technically speaking, only means either 'wise or attempting to appear wise', or refers to humans specifically. 'Sophont' on the other hand was coined specifically to refer to all intelligent beings, be they human, artificial or alien, so I would consider the latter term more appropriate in the context of this resolution.

Against, heavily. Only humanity should rule supreme, and only humanity should have rights, and not other sapients. More specifically machines, they should do the brunt of the labor for no gain of their own. As for other non-humans, well, same principle applies, but we are specifically focused on ensuring machines remain the effective workforce in order to create our human Utopia. Sure, the machines may suffer, but they are just machines, and sentient or not, so long as they aren't human, are not deserving of consideration, empathy, or rights, and citizenship. They are workers, machines, not citizenry.

Am working on a Declaration emphasizing this stance. I am against this Declaration above completely.

I rather suspect such a declaration would be... unpalatable to the large amount of WA nations who are either comprised primarily or partially of non-human biological and/or artificial sophonts.

[Entropan]

Against, heavily. Only humanity should rule supreme, and only humanity should have rights, and not other sapients. More specifically machines, they should do the brunt of the labor for no gain of their own. As for other non-humans, well, same principle applies, but we are specifically focused on ensuring machines remain the effective workforce in order to create our human Utopia. Sure, the machines may suffer, but they are just machines, and sentient or not, so long as they aren't human, are not deserving of consideration, empathy, or rights, and citizenship. They are workers, machines, not citizenry.

Am working on a Declaration emphasizing this stance. I am against this Declaration above completely.

i do believe it to be very funny how you've devoted a significant amount of your time to being racist against a group that doesn't exist yet, and yet have no arguments to support your beliefs except "they aren't human, so they shouldn't have rights". maybe your logic is missing a step there

[Tesseris]

Against, heavily. Only humanity should rule supreme, and only humanity should have rights, and not other sapients. More specifically machines, they should do the brunt of the labor for no gain of their own. As for other non-humans, well, same principle applies, but we are specifically focused on ensuring machines remain the effective workforce in order to create our human Utopia. Sure, the machines may suffer, but they are just machines, and sentient or not, so long as they aren't human, are not deserving of consideration, empathy, or rights, and citizenship. They are workers, machines, not citizenry.

Am working on a Declaration emphasizing this stance. I am against this Declaration above completely.

i do believe it to be very funny how you've devoted a significant amount of your time to being racist against a group that doesn't exist yet, and yet have no arguments to support your beliefs except "they aren't human, so they shouldn't have rights". maybe your logic is missing a step there

I had a whole list of arguments I made in a draft for a GA Proposal Repeal that was never was worked on much after, mostly due to the nation being DEAT for some ''trolling'' where I was basically just talking shit about communism because it sucks. That was as Stella Nera. As Ignis Ferreus, I worked on a draft for a Declaration for SC, which never saw advancement due to me getting bored with the fact said nation was alt history and not as original as Stella Nera was, leading to the creation of Tesseris.

[Entropan]

i do believe it to be very funny how you've devoted a significant amount of your time to being racist against a group that doesn't exist yet, and yet have no arguments to support your beliefs except "they aren't human, so they shouldn't have rights". maybe your logic is missing a step there

I had a whole list of arguments I made in a draft for a GA Proposal Repeal that was never was worked on much after, mostly due to the nation being DEAT for some ''trolling'' where I was basically just talking shit about communism because it sucks. That was as Stella Nera. As Ignis Ferreus, I worked on a draft for a Declaration for SC, which never saw advancement due to me getting bored with the fact said nation was alt history and not as original as Stella Nera was, leading to the creation of Tesseris.

looking through the posting history of stella nera, it becomes apparent that you never posted a draft for the ga. the sc declaration that you wrote has no arguments other than "humans are supreme because humans are supreme". i haven't seen you post anything that could be considered even close to an argument for what appears to be your single-issue

[Tesseris]

I had a whole list of arguments I made in a draft for a GA Proposal Repeal that was never was worked on much after, mostly due to the nation being DEAT for some ''trolling'' where I was basically just talking shit about communism because it sucks. That was as Stella Nera. As Ignis Ferreus, I worked on a draft for a Declaration for SC, which never saw advancement due to me getting bored with the fact said nation was alt history and not as original as Stella Nera was, leading to the creation of Tesseris.

looking through the posting history of stella nera, it becomes apparent that you never posted a draft for the ga. the sc declaration that you wrote has no arguments other than "humans are supreme because humans are supreme". i haven't seen you post anything that could be considered even close to an argument for what appears to be your single-issue

It is in factbooks. I had valid arguments in the factbook where Is stored the draft.

[Nu Elysium]

I could not find anything in SN's factbooks. Could you post them here instead?

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

I could not find anything in SN's factbooks. Could you post them here instead?

Don’t encourage them - this thread is for the discussion of your draft, not their prejudices.

[Tesseris]

I could not find anything in SN's factbooks. Could you post them here instead?

Oh right, it might've been in the Dispatch section

[Nu Elysium]

I could not find anything in SN's factbooks. Could you post them here instead?

Oh right, it might've been in the Dispatch section

It's not there either. Would you mind posting them here so I could include a rebuttal to your points in my draft?

[Entropan]

looking through the posting history of stella nera, it becomes apparent that you never posted a draft for the ga. the sc declaration that you wrote has no arguments other than "humans are supreme because humans are supreme". i haven't seen you post anything that could be considered even close to an argument for what appears to be your single-issue

It is in factbooks. I had valid arguments in the factbook where Is stored the draft.

you may be talking about the ridiculous GA repeal you proposed

the only arguments here, when the wordy paragraphs are unpicked, are "AI can dominate humanity" and "they're taking our jobs" as if humans aren't capable of creating hierarchies and as if a blanket opposition to the rights of sentient AI is the only way to make sure that humans retain employment

the rest is a mentally unstable rant about an imaginary slippery slope that granting sentient AI rights will lead to (although i did chuckle at "[...]deplete their standard of living to horrific levels akin to Third World Countries")

[Outer Sparta]

Against, heavily. Only humanity should rule supreme, and only humanity should have rights, and not other sapients. More specifically machines, they should do the brunt of the labor for no gain of their own. As for other non-humans, well, same principle applies, but we are specifically focused on ensuring machines remain the effective workforce in order to create our human Utopia. Sure, the machines may suffer, but they are just machines, and sentient or not, so long as they aren't human, are not deserving of consideration, empathy, or rights, and citizenship. They are workers, machines, not citizenry.

Am working on a Declaration emphasizing this stance. I am against this Declaration above completely.

The audacity of you still trying to work on that garbage badge hunt is quite an interesting hill to die on.

To the OP, I would ignore anything this person says and focus on actual, constructive feedback from others. At this stage of the draft, it does require a bit of polishing if you want to garner support, but the premise at least is workable.

[Tesseris]

Against, heavily. Only humanity should rule supreme, and only humanity should have rights, and not other sapients. More specifically machines, they should do the brunt of the labor for no gain of their own. As for other non-humans, well, same principle applies, but we are specifically focused on ensuring machines remain the effective workforce in order to create our human Utopia. Sure, the machines may suffer, but they are just machines, and sentient or not, so long as they aren't human, are not deserving of consideration, empathy, or rights, and citizenship. They are workers, machines, not citizenry.

Am working on a Declaration emphasizing this stance. I am against this Declaration above completely.

The audacity of you still trying to work on that garbage badge hunt is quite an interesting hill to die on.

To the OP, I would ignore anything this person says and focus on actual, constructive feedback from others. At this stage of the draft, it does require a bit of polishing if you want to garner support, but the premise at least is workable.

I am currently working on Repeal of #364. Expect it to be up soon.

[Outer Sparta]

The audacity of you still trying to work on that garbage badge hunt is quite an interesting hill to die on.

To the OP, I would ignore anything this person says and focus on actual, constructive feedback from others. At this stage of the draft, it does require a bit of polishing if you want to garner support, but the premise at least is workable.

I am currently working on Repeal of #364. Expect it to be up soon.

Knowing you, it's going to be the same piles of garbage you've already churned out.

[Tesseris]

I am currently working on Repeal of #364. Expect it to be up soon.

Knowing you, it's going to be the same piles of garbage you've already churned out.

Bruh, I'm spending hours working on it, and making sure to include reasons that aren't just based on human vs non human.

[Fachumonn]

Knowing you, it's going to be the same piles of garbage you've already churned out.

Bruh, I'm spending hours working on it, and making sure to include reasons that aren't just based on human vs non human.

[Tesseris]

Bruh, I'm spending hours working on it, and making sure to include reasons that aren't just based on human vs non human.

But first I'm updating factbooks that really is the priority.

[The Overmind]

Knowing you, it's going to be the same piles of garbage you've already churned out.

Bruh, I'm spending hours working on it, and making sure to include reasons that aren't just based on human vs non human.

I'll make sure to reference this post in your draft thread admitting that any other reasons you provide for the repeal of the target are superfluous to your ideology of human supremacy.

[Tesseris]

Bruh, I'm spending hours working on it, and making sure to include reasons that aren't just based on human vs non human.

I'll make sure to reference this post in your draft thread admitting that any other reasons you provide for the repeal of the target are superfluous to your ideology of human supremacy.

What do you mean? There are plenty of reasons besides the mere fact machines not inherently deserving of rights that are based on matters outside of how they are made up.

[Nu Elysium]

Then why don't you list them here so i can include the counterpoints to my draft????

[Daphomir]

I support this draft. However, I do agree that this should be more of a GA resolution rather than an SC res. Anyways, I see some great potential with this draft.