[Draft] Repeal "Rights and Duties of WA States"

[Sciongrad]

Category: Repeal | Target: GAR#2 | Proposed by: Sciongrad

The General Assembly,

Lauding the intention of GAR#2 to establish the basic rights and responsibilities of World Assembly member nations,

Mindful, however, of GAR#2's many shortcomings, which demand immediate remedy,

Appalled that article 5 of GAR#2, in attempting to establish basic principles of state sovereignty, absolutely bans warfare in all practical circumstances, preventing member nations from engaging in warfare in situations that are compatible with or even fortify the rights and values affirmed and espoused by the World Assembly,

Outraged that the aforementioned proscription on warfare specifically exempts invaders but does not allow for good faith retaliation by the member nation being invaded,

Observing with consternation that article 8 of GAR#2 demands uniformity of law in member nations, eliminating any and all national sovereignty despite paradoxically proclaiming in article 1 that "WA Member State[s have] the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, without dictation by any other NationState, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of government,"

Concerned that GAR#2 explicitly bans civil war by defining war as "as a consensual act between two or more NationStates," thereby foreclosing any possibility for oppressed people to escape totalitarianism,

Disgusted that GAR#2 explicitly states in article 12 that member nations are a bunch of losers whose prom dates only went with them because their moms begged them to,

Offended by the rampant homophobic language interspersed throughout the draft, with which the very gay author of this repeal takes personal issue,

Considering the flaws discussed thus far to be absolutely true and therefore not only a legitimate basis for repeal but an exigency that must be addressed immediately, and thus

Hereby repeals GAR#2, "Rights and Duties of Member States."

"To inaugurate the new rule set handed down by the secretariat, Sciongrad presents its first repeal in years."

[Railana]

((OOC: Full support. Good luck.))

[Sciongrad]

((OOC: Full support. Good luck.))

OOC: Thank you! The "disgusted" and "offended" clauses are tentative, but I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts on them.

[Tinfect]

"The Imperium, while aware of the fact that this repeal would send an effective message to the Secretariat regarding recent alterations in policy, we cannot support any repeal that utilizes complete falsehoods as its sole arguments."

[Wallenburg]

"The Imperium, while aware of the fact that this repeal would send an effective message to the Secretariat regarding recent alterations in policy, we cannot support any repeal that utilizes complete falsehoods as its sole arguments."

"Mine, on the other hand, can. You have our full support on this draft, Ambassador."

[Floor 448]

Kinda agree; this is just the resolution needed to send a message to the mods that the new rule set is f*cked up.

[Frisbeeteria]

Offended by the rampant homophobic language interspersed throughout the draft, with which the very gay author of this resolution takes personal issue,

I'm not "very gay" at all. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Sciongrad]

Offended by the rampant homophobic language interspersed throughout the draft, with which the very gay author of this resolution takes personal issue,

I'm not "very gay" at all. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

OOC: I meant me. That should read "this repeal."

[The Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper]

ARI: Homophobic language? Oh dear. I never realized. This has our unwavering support!

AHUME: WHAT? (he whispers in Ari's ear but Ari brushes him off.)

ARI: Look, cut that out. Besides, no one wants to hear about the "joke proposal" rule still being in place. They want the Secretariat's ass and they want it now! Erm, that is, not in the way you want the Secretariat's ass. Don't think we haven't noticed the way you look at her when you think no one's watching....

[Sandaoguo]

You joke, but NatSov-baiting would probably be a good strategy in getting WAR#2 repealed. Appeal to the inherent desire of so many people to hate having rules put upon them. Take the wind from out of NatSovers' sails by using their arguments against them!

[Excidium Planetis]

Concerned that GAR#2 explicitly bans civil war by defining war as "as a consensual act between two or more NationStates," thereby foreclosing any possibility for oppressed people to escape totalitarianism,

"You jest, but there is validity in this clause. Civil war is paradoxically not war according to GA#2. Thus, GA#2 makes civil war impossible, any conflict between two non-state factions is then not civil war."

[John Turner]

Full support from The Federation. Let me know what I can do to assist?

[Bananaistan]

Full support. The only change I would suggest is that in the appalled by clause "bans absolutely warfare" should be changed to "absolutely bans warfare" or "completely bans warfare".

[Sciongrad]

Full support. The only change I would suggest is that in the appalled by clause "bans absolutely warfare" should be changed to "absolutely bans warfare" or "completely bans warfare".

"Good catch. I meant 'absolutely bans warfare.'

I'm also confused by all of the accusations that this is somehow a joke."

[Wusmeinia]

This has my support, keep up the good work.

[Separatist Peoples]

Bell sits quietly in the corner, holding a grenade in one hand and an approval stamp in the other. He shrugs and throws both at the drafting podium.


The grenade, of course, turns into a puff of purple smoke.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Is this a joke? The GA just defeated a repeal of this resolution, and quite handily. You better have the best draft in the world (assuming the voters read it) if you want to revisit it so soon.

At any rate, this paradox:

Observing with consternation that article 8 of GAR#2 demands uniformity of law in member nations, eliminating any and all national sovereignty despite paradoxically proclaiming in article 1 that "WA Member State[s have] the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, without dictation by any other NationState, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of government,"

is not paradoxical at all. The World Assembly is not a "NationState."

[Separatist Peoples]

Is this a joke? The GA just defeated a repeal of this resolution, and quite handily. You better have the best draft in the world (assuming the voters read it) if you want to revisit it so soon.

At any rate, this paradox:

Observing with consternation that article 8 of GAR#2 demands uniformity of law in member nations, eliminating any and all national sovereignty despite paradoxically proclaiming in article 1 that "WA Member State[s have] the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, without dictation by any other NationState, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of government,"

is not paradoxical at all. The World Assembly is not a "NationState."

"Lying is acceptable in repeals now. The Sciongrad delegation can write whatever the hell they want." Bell says in a defeated tone.

[Sciongrad]

Is this a joke? The GA just defeated a repeal of this resolution, and quite handily. You better have the best draft in the world (assuming the voters read it) if you want to revisit it so soon.

At any rate, this paradox:

Observing with consternation that article 8 of GAR#2 demands uniformity of law in member nations, eliminating any and all national sovereignty despite paradoxically proclaiming in article 1 that "WA Member State[s have] the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, without dictation by any other NationState, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of government,"

is not paradoxical at all. The World Assembly is not a "NationState."

OOC: This is satire mocking the new rules. Every single clause included is an extreme exaggeration or outright lie. But you're right, I should acknowledge that they're lies, because if the moderators mistakenly assumed I was honestly misinterpreting the resolution, this would be illegal.

[Railana]

Is this a joke? The GA just defeated a repeal of this resolution, and quite handily. You better have the best draft in the world (assuming the voters read it) if you want to revisit it so soon.

At any rate, this paradox:


is not paradoxical at all. The World Assembly is not a "NationState."

OOC: This is satire mocking the new rules. Every single clause included is an extreme exaggeration or outright lie. But you're right, I should acknowledge that they're lies, because if the moderators mistakenly assumed I was honestly misinterpreting the resolution, this would be illegal.

((OOC: Yes, how does that work, exactly? It's illegal to accidentally misinterpret a resolution in the context of a repeal, but it's perfectly fine to deliberately do so? How does that make any sense? How can such a rule even be enforced, given that the author can just turn around and say, "yes, I knew what I wrote was a lie all along"?))

[Sciongrad]

OOC: This is satire mocking the new rules. Every single clause included is an extreme exaggeration or outright lie. But you're right, I should acknowledge that they're lies, because if the moderators mistakenly assumed I was honestly misinterpreting the resolution, this would be illegal.

((OOC: Yes, how does that work, exactly? It's illegal to accidentally misinterpret a resolution in the context of a repeal, but it's perfectly fine to deliberately do so? How does that make any sense? How can such a rule even be enforced, given that the author can just turn around and say, "yes, I knew what I wrote was a lie all along"?))

OOC: That's the best part! This rule is unenforceable! And even if it wasn't, it wouldn't make any sense to arbitrarily make a distinction between honest mistakes and deliberate misrepresentations. And, unsurprisingly, no moderator has attempted to justify this bizarre aspect of the rule yet, despite Kryozerkia promising good faith explanations from them.

[Separatist Peoples]

And, unsurprisingly, no moderator has attempted to justify this bizarre aspect of the rule yet, despite Kryozerkia promising good faith explanations from them.

OOC: I'm pretty sure that all the moderators are adults with professional jobs in their own right to consider. Even spread across the planet, there are likely to be times they can't jump to explain things to us. Patience is a virtue.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

What kind of message are these repeal drafts supposed to be sending? The mods hardly read these forums anymore anyway.

[Excidium Planetis]

What kind of message are these repeal drafts supposed to be sending? The mods hardly read these forums anymore anyway.

That's why I submitted mine. They have to see that.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

What kind of message are these repeal drafts supposed to be sending? The mods hardly read these forums anymore anyway.

That's why I submitted mine. They have to see that.

I filed a GHR, then retracted it when I realized it was a protest.