[DRAFT] REPEAL GAR #369, "Reproductive Education Act"

[Blaccakre]

Ugh... what have you people been doing while I've been gone.

Repeal GAR #369, the "Reproductive Education Act"

Applauding the World Assembly's commitment to education and knowledge;

Recognizing the many good resolutions which contribute to the pursuit of knowledge and/or assist member nations in providing critical education services to their people;

Aware, however, that the specifics of school curriculums is a matter best left to local communities to set for themselves;

Recognizing that this is so because local communities are in a better position than international bureaucrats to make good decision on behalf of their children;

Concerned that GAR #369 takes away the power of local school boards and communities to best serve their children by regulating the age and subject matter of sexual education;

Recalling that GAR #369 requires that all children experiencing reproductive maturation be enrolled in a reproductive eduction course if those children have not received sufficient education already;

Also recalling that GAR #369 requires that such courses instruct children not only on the biology of reproduction, but on the process and biology of sexual activity;

Recognizing, as GAR #369 does, that there is a material difference between an education on reproduction as a biological discipline, and an education on sexual activity.

Seriously questioning the wisdom of instructing children on the process and biology of sexual activity at a time when they are experiencing reproductive maturity;

Recalling that GAR #369 requires that all general education services include reproductive education according to the timeline and dictates of the act;

Recognizing that many religious and cultural minorities have specific, traditional educational models that will be substantially changed and altered as a result of this law'

Recognizing also that the World Assembly has passed several laws in the past explicitly protecting people's diversity, freedom of conscience, and belief;

Aware that there are MANY less invasive ways to properly provide an education on reproduction that do not require violating people's ethical or cultural views, not the least of which would have been to allow for supplemental reproductive education rather than forcing it to be part of all general education services;

Believing that the World Assembly should not sanction unnecessary and invasive intrusions on the cultural traditions of others;

Recognizing that with GAR #369 repealed, the local school boards will still be able to provide reproductive education to children according to a reasonable and appropriate curriculum that they set;

Further recognizing that with GAR #369 removed, the World Assembly could work on a more measured approach to supporting reproductive education programs within member nations, rather than ham-fisted timelines and mandates;

For all the forgoing reasons the World Assembly hereby REPEALS GAR #369, "Reproductive Education Act".

[Sciongrad]

"All these attempts are in vain. The WA will not repeal legislation on issues of reproductive freedom, ever. GAR#286 prohibits action against sex-selective abortion and the WA has resoundingly defeated three repeal attempts. This is, frankly, a waste of time."

[Blaccakre]

"All these attempts are in vain. The WA will not repeal legislation on issues of reproductive freedom, ever. GAR#286 prohibits action against sex-selective abortion and the WA has resoundingly defeated three repeal attempts. This is, frankly, a waste of time."

This isn't about reproductive freedom, is it? This is about education. I think there's a material difference between this garbage and the abortion debate in general.

[Wrapper]

"All these attempts are in vain. The WA will not repeal legislation on issues of reproductive freedom, ever. GAR#286 prohibits action against sex-selective abortion and the WA has resoundingly defeated three repeal attempts. This is, frankly, a waste of time."

You should probably read the OP again, Scion.

[Wallenburg]

I'm struggling to find a claim in your repeal that isn't some variation of a NatSov argument.

[Sciongrad]

"All these attempts are in vain. The WA will not repeal legislation on issues of reproductive freedom, ever. GAR#286 prohibits action against sex-selective abortion and the WA has resoundingly defeated three repeal attempts. This is, frankly, a waste of time."

You should probably read the OP again, Scion.

OOC: I was unclear. This is not about GAR#286 specifically, that was only an example. Repeals of issues on reproductive issues in general are futile. The WA is ultra liberal in this regard and will never repeal a resolution on abortion, sex ed, etc.

[Blaccakre]

I'm struggling to find a claim in your repeal that isn't some variation of a NatSov argument.

A "Nat Sov" argument comes down to "nations should be allowed to decide for themselves on this issue". The content here goes WELL beyond that into questions of freedom of belief and conscience, as well as an indictment of what I view to be the more absurd requirements of the act. It's not Nat Sov only, if that's what your suggesting.

[Separatist Peoples]

"When it comes down to it, all repeal arguments are, at their core, NatSov arguments, because resolutions that pass are de facto legal. That these are as fleshed out as they are and address unforseen or tangential issues that the target resolution creates, and considering not a one reads as "NATIONS CAN DO WAT THEY WANT!!1", this definitely does not run afoul of any NatSov only rules. Its well-constructed, and only mentions religious considerations once, which is about half my usual tolerance for repeals with religiously based arguments. I like it."

Ugh... what have you people been doing while I've been gone.

"Nothing good. Breaking shit, mostly. Generally drinking or embarrassing ourselves and...Oh, you meant the Assembly as a whole? Same thing."

[Wallenburg]

I'm struggling to find a claim in your repeal that isn't some variation of a NatSov argument.

A "Nat Sov" argument comes down to "nations should be allowed to decide for themselves on this issue". The content here goes WELL beyond that into questions of freedom of belief and conscience, as well as an indictment of what I view to be the more absurd requirements of the act. It's not Nat Sov only, if that's what your suggesting.

"You are extrapolating from resolutions protecting freedom of belief and the like, extending a penumbra out to a supposed right to do whatever their beliefs tell them they should do. You are effectively taking the national sovereignty argument and adapting it for local communities and individuals. I may not have expressed myself well, but that is what I am getting at."

[Railana]

"All these attempts are in vain. The WA will not repeal legislation on issues of reproductive freedom, ever. GAR#286 prohibits action against sex-selective abortion and the WA has resoundingly defeated three repeal attempts. This is, frankly, a waste of time."

((OOC: I'm seriously thinking about submitting this just to see if it'll get passed.))

[Tinfect]

Aware, however, that the specifics of school curriculums is a matter best left to local communities to set for themselves;

"Do you have any evidence for this claim? The Imperium can provide several centuries and countless institutions worth of evidence precisely to the contrary."

Recognizing that this is so because local communities are in a better position than international bureaucrats to make good decision on behalf of their children;

"Again, do provide evidence. The Imperium is aware of several communities that made the simply wrong decision of not providing such education."

Concerned that GAR #369 takes away the power of local school boards and communities to best serve their children by regulating the age and subject matter of sexual education;

"The Imperium sees nothing wrong with this. We do not consider arguments of National Sovereignty to be sufficient for repeal, and we most certainly do not consider arguments of local sovereignty to be valid in any form."

Recalling that GAR #369 requires that all children experiencing reproductive maturation be enrolled in a reproductive eduction course if those children have not received sufficient education already;

"And this is considered a bad thing by your Government?"

Also recalling that GAR #369 requires that such courses instruct children not only on the biology of reproduction, but on the process and biology of sexual activity;

"We fail to see how this is an argument against the resolution."

Seriously questioning the wisdom of instructing children on the process and biology of sexual activity at a time when they are experiencing reproductive maturity;

"... Ambassador, perhaps you misunderstand the Resolution. Please explain exactly what it is you are questioning."

Recalling that GAR #369 requires that all general education services include reproductive education according to the timeline and dictates of the act;

"Ambassador, there is no timeline in the Resolution, and in any case, we do not consider this to be an argument against the resolution. Private Institutions have no right to be except from the standards expected of educational facilities."

Recognizing that many religious and cultural minorities have specific, traditional educational models that will be substantially changed and altered as a result of this law'

"How horrible. They will be forced to join those of us in the modern era. We have little respect for primitives that believe such things to be of greater importance than education, and would choose to deny that education rather than to adapt."

Aware that there are MANY less invasive ways to properly provide an education on reproduction that do not require violating people's ethical or cultural views, not the least of which would have been to allow for supplemental reproductive education rather than forcing it to be part of all general education services;

"And doing so would have rendered this legislation worthless, as those states that deny students such education would be free to continue doing so. In any case, if basic education violates various cultural and ethical views, then those views, alongside such things as slavery and genocide, are best discarded."

Believing that the World Assembly should not sanction unnecessary and invasive intrusions on the cultural traditions of others;

"This is a necessary intrusion. In any case, this is merely a further interpretation of National Sovereignty argumentation, and is in no way valid.""

Recognizing that with GAR #369 repealed, the local school boards will still be able to provide reproductive education to children according to a reasonable and appropriate curriculum that they set;

"Assuming the existence of local educational boards is foolish, at best, and in those states that need this education most, the education will once more cease to be available. This is unacceptable.

Further recognizing that with GAR #369 removed, the World Assembly could work on a more measured approach to supporting reproductive education programs within member nations, rather than ham-fisted timelines and mandates;

"And that legislation will be ineffective and worthless.

For all the reasons above, we find this draft lacking in both substantive argument, and simple ethics. Needless to say, we are completely opposed to this draft and any further iterations upon it."

[Bears Armed]

You should probably read the OP again, Scion.

OOC: I was unclear. This is not about GAR#286 specifically, that was only an example. Repeals of issues on reproductive issues in general are futile. The WA is ultra liberal in this regard and will never repeal a resolution on abortion, sex ed, etc.

viewtopic.php?p=24711998#p24711998 ?

[Imperium Anglorum]

OOC: I was unclear. This is not about GAR#286 specifically, that was only an example. Repeals of issues on reproductive issues in general are futile. The WA is ultra liberal in this regard and will never repeal a resolution on abortion, sex ed, etc.

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... #p24711998 ?

Game of Thrones, man. Game of Thrones.