[Passed] Quarantine Regulation

[Umeria]

Well the Cogorian government would still strongly feel purging all infected persons would be a necessary harm, to end their suffering.

Unnecessary harm, not suffering. Killing someone causes a lot more harm than disease symptoms do. Murder is not necessary, as it was not needed to comply with any of the other clauses. Therefore, killing an infected person is unnecessary harm, and must be prevented due to iii of 2(d). So, no purging.

[Araraukar]

However, democratic and non-authoritarian nations may feel it's extreme and potentially unreasonable.

Eh, I would say that also many non-democratic and authoritarian nations would say it's very extreme and unreasonable. Mine certainly would.

Therefore, killing an infected person is unnecessary harm, and must be prevented due to iii of 2(d). So, no purging.

If it's killing them or letting the suffer indefinitely in the quarantine, one has to wonder where the point comes where it's more harm to keep them effectively imprisoned until they die of natural causes, than letting them die quickly and (at least relatively) painlessly.

Funnily enough, nations can decide on euthanasia legality on their own, but they can't use WA money to perform the assisted suicides. Suicides themselves are legal, but I'm not sure if "suicide-by-armed-security" counts legally as a suicide. Then again, WA hasn't criminalized murder except in certain very specific cases.

...so all in all, a purge of all infected probably wouldn't be acceptable with this proposal, but sometimes, especially in war-time, desperate measures may have to be enacted.

OOC: That reminds me, Umeria, if this fails to either get quorum or fails at the vote, you might want to consider some war-time exceptions.

[Umeria]

If it's killing them or letting the suffer indefinitely in the quarantine, one has to wonder where the point comes where it's more harm to keep them effectively imprisoned until they die of natural causes, than letting them die quickly and (at least relatively) painlessly.

Well, in the cases where there are no treatments and the disease is just going to sit there, death might be an option. But not the senseless massacre that the Cogorian ambassador proposed.

Then again, WA hasn't criminalized murder except in certain very specific cases

Yes, but in most cases murder is an unnecessary harm. Unnecessary harm must be prevented due to iii of 2(d). Hence, murder must be prevented. It's illegal in this case.

but sometimes, especially in war-time, desperate measures may have to be enacted

If they're that desperate then the EPARC should be assisting them.

OOC: That reminds me, Umeria, if this fails to either get quorum or fails at the vote, you might want to consider some war-time exceptions.

Again, EPARC assistance.

[Kryozerkia]

However, democratic and non-authoritarian nations may feel it's extreme and potentially unreasonable.

Eh, I would say that also many non-democratic and authoritarian nations would say it's very extreme and unreasonable. Mine certainly would.

Of course. I didn't mean to exclude them.

[Calladan]

The needs of the many out way the needs of the few, seems a better starting point for my nation. So we'll fence off the area filled with sickos, extract any non infected and then purge. We will of course comply with the legislation and provide proper protection for the troops.

So, just to be clear, you (personally and individually) would be happy to be killed, rather than treated? Because if that is true then, while I still disagree with your stand, I have to admire your principles.

[Cogoria]

Every Cogorian would willingly put the fate of our great nation before our insignificant and expendable lives. And would the Umeria representative tell me who decides what constitutes "Unnecessary" harm? Surely if my government decides it is necessary to drop Napalm on a quarantine zone, then it would be necessary harm, in order to suppress the disease?

[Umeria]

Every Cogorian would willingly put the fate of our great nation before our insignificant and expendable lives.

So, if you were infected, you would commit suicide instead of take a pill.

And would the Umeria representative tell me who decides what constitutes "Unnecessary" harm?

An unnecessary harm is, by definition, any harm that is not necessary.

Surely if my government decides it is necessary

What your government thinks has no impact on reality. What's necessary is preventing unnecessary harm, and murder, in most cases, is unnecessary harm.

to drop Napalm on a quarantine zone, then it would be necessary harm, in order to suppress the disease?

If that's the only way to suppress the disease, sure. But it's not. If you keep the infected persons in an isolated area, the disease won't go anywhere. If you need help creating an isolated area, just ask the EPARC.

[Cogoria]

What the Representative of Umeria seems unwilling to grasp is that we may deem lethal force as necessary. Using the term "Unnecessary" allows us to cause harm should we deem it necessary to do so. Simply because your unpatriotic population would not sacrifice themselves willingly for the good of the Nation, should not limit the people of other Nations who would proudly end their lives before allowing misfortune to befall the Nation. But due to the wording of the document, there is no constraint on what is "unnecessary".

And yes I would kill myself for the sake of my nation. Wouldn't you?

[Umeria]

What the Representative of Umeria seems unwilling to grasp is that we may deem lethal force as necessary. Using the term "Unnecessary" allows us to cause harm should we deem it necessary to do so.

Your government has to comply with this meaning of necessary:

nec·es·sar·y/nesəˌserē
adjective
1.
required to be done, achieved, or present; needed; essential.
"members are admitted only after they have gained the necessary experience"
synonyms: obligatory, requisite, required, compulsory, mandatory, imperative, needed, de rigueur
2.
determined, existing, or happening by natural laws or predestination; inevitable.
"a necessary consequence"
synonyms: inevitable, unavoidable, inescapable, inexorable, ineluctable

If the action doesn't meet that definition of necessary, then it's unnecessary.

Simply because your unpatriotic population would not sacrifice themselves willingly for the good of the Nation

How would dying benefit the nation?

should not limit the people of other Nations who would proudly end their lives before allowing misfortune to befall the Nation.

How could any misfortune occur if they're in a quarantine?

But due to the wording of the document, there is no constraint on what is "unnecessary".

That's like saying you won't comply with any resolution because they all start with "description", and your interpretation of "description" is "you don't have to comply with any of the following". If you want to know what is unnecessary, just pick up a dictionary.

And yes I would kill myself for the sake of my nation. Wouldn't you?

Taking a pill and healing myself is a lot more beneficial to my nation than dying for no reason.

[Cogoria]

The definition of unnecessary still allows for me to cull the infected population should my government deem it necessary. Therefore we would be in full compliance with the regulation. All we would not e complying with is the spirit which you feel it must be utilised. But our actions would be perfectly legal. To be honest We cannot understand why you are so argumentative over this? After all Cogoria intends to vote in favour of it should it be brought to the Assembly

[Kryozerkia]

The definition of unnecessary still allows for me to cull the infected population should my government deem it necessary. Therefore we would be in full compliance with the regulation. All we would not e complying with is the spirit which you feel it must be utilised. But our actions would be perfectly legal. To be honest We cannot understand why you are so argumentative over this? After all Cogoria intends to vote in favour of it should it be brought to the Assembly

I can't disagree with that logic.

[Umeria]

The definition of unnecessary still allows for me to cull the infected population should my government deem it necessary.

Why do you think your government has the authority to decide what "necessary" means?

Therefore we would be in full compliance with the regulation. All we would not e complying with is the spirit which you feel it must be utilised. But our actions would be perfectly legal.

If the infected persons can take a pill to become non-contagious, why should they be nuked instead?

To be honest We cannot understand why you are so argumentative over this? After all Cogoria intends to vote in favour of it should it be brought to the Assembly

I don't want thousands of innocent Cogorians massacred for no reason.

[Cogoria]

My government isn't deciding what necessary means, merely deciding what it feels IS necessary. We feel we are required to cull the infected. We feel we are obliged to shoot them dead. We believe it is imperative that the sick be killed for the benefit of the nation. We feel the enforced euthanasia is needed. Just to use a few synonyms from your definition, just to help make our point clearer.

No one mentioned using nuclear weapons. Cogoria does not even posses nuclear arms.

The infected would still be killed, your submitted regulation simply will not interfere with this. You should be more concerned with how your own government implements it and leave Cogorian affairs to Cogoria, as long as we are not breaking international law. Which we will still be complying with should this regulation pass.

[Calladan]

And yes I would kill myself for the sake of my nation. Wouldn't you?

If it's a choice between that and getting treated for whatever infection I have, no I bloody well wouldn't, and I really can not imagine any vaguely sane person who would.

Yes - there are times I would die for Calladan, but if I had a disease that could be treated, and that could be contained by sticking me in a room on my own until I was treated, then I think dying would be a MASSIVE over-reaction (and - quite honestly - an abduration of my duty. Although, there is a chance abduration is not the word I am looking for).

[Separatist Peoples]

My government isn't deciding what necessary means, merely deciding what it feels IS necessary. We feel we are required to cull the infected. We feel we are obliged to shoot them dead. We believe it is imperative that the sick be killed for the benefit of the nation. We feel the enforced euthanasia is needed. Just to use a few synonyms from your definition, just to help make our point clearer.

No one mentioned using nuclear weapons. Cogoria does not even posses nuclear arms.

The infected would still be killed, your submitted regulation simply will not interfere with this. You should be more concerned with how your own government implements it and leave Cogorian affairs to Cogoria, as long as we are not breaking international law. Which we will still be complying with should this regulation pass.

"If you are considering it euthanasia, then it is a medical procedure, and thus you cannot administer it without consent. That's great for your ultrapatriots, but it isn't going to fly for the more rational members of your society."

[Cogoria]

And that, Mrs McGill, is your prerogative. Our nation's cultures are most likely different. And may I ask, what if you were infected with an incurable highly infectious disease that caused an agonising, debilitating death. Would you choose death then, I wonder?

[Cogoria]

Why would we require something as mundane as permission? It is defined as a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering. Our government is the legal guardian of all our citizens, we merely deem them medically unfit to decide what is best for them, then as their guardian approve their death. Their permission is hardly needed when the health of the entire nation is at risk.

[Umeria]

My government isn't deciding what necessary means, merely deciding what it feels IS necessary. We feel we are required to cull the infected. We feel we are obliged to shoot them dead. We believe it is imperative that the sick be killed for the benefit of the nation. We feel the enforced euthanasia is needed. Just to use a few synonyms from your definition, just to help make our point clearer.

Okay... but why does your government feel that way? Why give an infected person a bullet instead of a pill?

No one mentioned using nuclear weapons. Cogoria does not even posses nuclear arms.

In that case, what is "dropping Naplam on a quarantine zone"?

The infected would still be killed, your submitted regulation simply will not interfere with this. You should be more concerned with how your own government implements it and leave Cogorian affairs to Cogoria, as long as we are not breaking international law. Which we will still be complying with should this regulation pass.

I'm not questioning that; I'm questioning why you're doing it in the first place.

Why would we require something as mundane as permission? It is defined as a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering. Our government is the legal guardian of all our citizens, we merely deem them medically unfit to decide what is best for them, then as their guardian approve their death. Their permission is hardly needed when the health of the entire nation is at risk.

Euthanasia is fine, even under those circumstances, but not if the disease can be eradicated by means other than death.

[Cogoria]

You don't need to understand, you are not Cogorian. A Cogorian would understand.Napalm is an incendiary weapon with a jelly like consistency, useful for removing large amounts of foliage or people. If a means other than death exists, we may use it. Depends on the circumstances. For say an un lethal flu or some such. But a dangerous epidemic? Safer to eradicate it at the source.

[Umeria]

You don't need to understand, you are not Cogorian. A Cogorian would understand.Napalm is an incendiary weapon with a jelly like consistency, useful for removing large amounts of foliage or people. If a means other than death exists, we may use it. Depends on the circumstances. For say an un lethal flu or some such. But a dangerous epidemic? Safer to eradicate it at the source.

If that's how your people want to go about it, fine. Just remember that in years to come, I will think back to this discussion and wonder why the Congorian people are so willing to take their lives.

[Cogoria]

Not willing to take their own lives, merely willing to sacrifice themselves upon the alter of the State.

[Umeria]

Not willing to take their own lives, merely willing to sacrifice themselves upon the alter of the State.

Again, I accept this, but I still don't understand.

[States of Glory WA Office]

Yes - there are times I would die for Calladan, but if I had a disease that could be treated, and that could be contained by sticking me in a room on my own until I was treated, then I think dying would be a MASSIVE over-reaction (and - quite honestly - an abduration of my duty. Although, there is a chance abduration is not the word I am looking for).

Neville: The word you're looking for is 'abjuration', Ambassador. We'd also like to condemn Cogoria's policy on dealing with quarantines and epidemics.

[Umeria]

We'd also like to condemn Cogoria's policy on dealing with quarantines and epidemics.

Seconded. Also, the Cogorian ambassador refuses to explain exaclty why his people would voluntarily undergo needless slaughter.

[Calladan]

Yes - there are times I would die for Calladan, but if I had a disease that could be treated, and that could be contained by sticking me in a room on my own until I was treated, then I think dying would be a MASSIVE over-reaction (and - quite honestly - an abduration of my duty. Although, there is a chance abduration is not the word I am looking for).

Neville: The word you're looking for is 'abjuration', Ambassador. We'd also like to condemn Cogoria's policy on dealing with quarantines and epidemics.

Thank you - I am good at some things, but spelling, it turns out, is not one of them (But given that only 95% of my job involves communicating through the written word, spelling probably isn't that important, right?)