[DEFEATED] Commend Christian Democrats

[Feux]

Hell. I'd vote for this. Fundamentally, I tend to disagree and vote against many of CD's world assembly proposal; however, regardless of his political and religious positions he is a very hard working and talented players worthy of note.

[Auralia]

Due to the fact it was submitted under "Moral Decency" which describes "A resolution to restrict civil freedoms in the interest of moral decency." Henceforth rape would have had to have been legal in the first place, for it to be restricted under the proposal in the name of moral decency.

If I recall correctly, CD wanted to submit the resolution under Human Rights. The mods ruled (incorrectly) that it had to be submitted under Moral Decency.

[Charax]

The nominee is bad and should feel bad.

[WIw]

The nominee is bad and should feel bad.

Yeah. These kind of 'Nations' are one main reason why leader of Mighty Wiw is (and will be) Atheist. Every Wiwian mothers have natural rights to interrupt their pregnancies (Wiw's population increasement per day currently: Several millions) or make abortions and no religious lunatics (regardless of particular faith) can do anything about that. That Aside, Nominee Simply doesn't deserve Commendation, not to mention that 'Christian' and 'Democracy' are something we Wiwians cannot easily fit in the same sentence. Sorry. NO!

[New Matawan]

Regardless of whether you agree with him or not (I don't, btw), there's no denying that Christian Democrats has had a large impact on the WA. He works hard, always puts in his best efforts, never backs down from a debate, and consistently puts up results. I may disagree wih nearly every word he types, but those are commendable skills nonetheless.

I'd support a slightly more neutral rewrite, though; he does have a large hatedom, you know, and a glowing recognition would have difficulty gettig to the floor.

[Mousebumples]

Regardless of whether you agree with him or not (I don't, btw), there's no denying that Christian Democrats has had a large impact on the WA. He works hard, always puts in his best efforts, never backs down from a debate, and consistently puts up results. I may disagree wih nearly every word he types, but those are commendable skills nonetheless.

Is that part (that I've bolded) necessarily a commendable habit? Sometimes, if you're wrong (which he has been - factually - on occasion), the decent thing to do is to concede the point and move on. IIRC, when I repealed his Organ and Blood Donations Act (Debate of Repeal), he refused to concede that the text of his resolution did not work exactly as he had intended it to, due to the unfortunate truism: The law does what the law says.

I certainly understand him not wanting to have his piece of legislation be repealed. And, in some ways, perhaps I should thank him for his persistence, as it made me do more research, which probably improved the repeal text, overall. However, there's a fine line between dogged persistence and stubbornness. In my experience (which, granted, I have not been terribly active as of late, so his behavior patterns may have changed), he flirts with that line more than may be appropriate in a nominee for a commendation.

[New Matawan]

Regardless of whether you agree with him or not (I don't, btw), there's no denying that Christian Democrats has had a large impact on the WA. He works hard, always puts in his best efforts, never backs down from a debate, and consistently puts up results. I may disagree wih nearly every word he types, but those are commendable skills nonetheless.

Is that part (that I've bolded) necessarily a commendable habit? Sometimes, if you're wrong (which he has been - factually - on occasion), the decent thing to do is to concede the point and move on. IIRC, when I repealed his Organ and Blood Donations Act (Debate of Repeal), he refused to concede that the text of his resolution did not work exactly as he had intended it to, due to the unfortunate truism: The law does what the law says.

I certainly understand him not wanting to have his piece of legislation be repealed. And, in some ways, perhaps I should thank him for his persistence, as it made me do more research, which probably improved the repeal text, overall. However, there's a fine line between dogged persistence and stubbornness. In my experience (which, granted, I have not been terribly active as of late, so his behavior patterns may have changed), he flirts with that line more than may be appropriate in a nominee for a commendation.

Eh, maybe wrong word choice on my part, sorry. But you get my point, right?

[Mousebumples]

Eh, maybe wrong word choice on my part, sorry. But you get my point, right?

Sorta. I understand what you're trying to say, but I disagree that CD exemplifies such a characteristic in a commendable manner.

[Cerian Quilor]

Just because he's done a lot for the WAGA doesn't inherently = commendation.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Due to the fact it was submitted under "Moral Decency" which describes "A resolution to restrict civil freedoms in the interest of moral decency." Henceforth rape would have had to have been legal in the first place, for it to be restricted under the proposal in the name of moral decency.

If I recall correctly, CD wanted to submit the resolution under Human Rights. The mods ruled (incorrectly) that it had to be submitted under Moral Decency.

Yes, that is exactly right. Moreover, the assertion that since the resolution "restricted freedoms," rape was therefore de facto legal in all member states is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard. If I recall correctly, rape had already been outlawed by previous resolutions.

[Auralia]

Just because he's done a lot for the WAGA doesn't inherently = commendation.

Indeed, and this proposal isn't based exclusively on CD's GA work.

[Communist Eraser]

I support a condemnation. He's put in a real effort to be a pantomime villain figure in NS. I respect that.

[Auralia]

Submitted.

[South Pacific Belschaft]

Opposed. The only particular noteworthy thing CD has done is author WA resolutions, and I detest the circle jerk that the SC is; write enough WA resolutions and someone else will write one commending you, boosting their number of WA resolutions, in turn getting themselves commended in the future for writing lots of WA resolutions.

[Bicross fountain]

Opposed. Too conservative for my tastes.

[Anarchic Plains]

Opposed. Too conservative for my tastes.

Mine too, but you can't vote against somebody being commended just because of their views. I'm voting against because they've forced those views down my neck and they haven't done an awful lot else.

[Frisbeeteria]

you can't vote against somebody being commended just because of their views.

Sure you can. You can vote against them for whatever reason you like. I'm voting against them because they didn't send me a Black Forest Torte on my birthday, and I really like Black Forest Tortes.

[The Scientific States]

I'm sincerely hoping a SC resolution that praises the Catholic view of the world and being Pro Life doesn't pass.

[Stalliongrad and Far-Eastern Territories]

The USUN will not be approving this commendation, as the candidate has not made a significant impact on the wellbeing of the Citizens of the world, and approving this will cheapen commendations as a whole.

[Charax]

you can't vote against somebody being commended just because of their views.

Sure you can. You can vote against them for whatever reason you like. I'm voting against them because they didn't send me a Black Forest Torte on my birthday, and I really like Black Forest Tortes.

Well, you can. But you should at least try and come up with an excuse if you're going to.

[Chester Pearson]

I'm sincerely hoping a SC resolution that praises the Catholic view of the world and being Pro Life doesn't pass.

Agreed.

[Anarchic Plains]

Amazed by the numerous other contributions of Christian Democrats to various regions throughout the world, including the Rejected Realms as the former head of the Office of Internal Affairs and the Office of Culture, Balder as a contributing author to that region's first constitution, and Westphalia as vice-delegate of that region and as a member of that region's legislature,

Sorry to double post, but This in particular really irks me. I've been the Ulaire Enquea of Mordor and one of its Nazgul Councillors, I've been a Foreign Affairs Wali of Osiris, Vice President, Minister of Defence, Legislator, Minister Without Portfolio and Vice Delegate of Spiritus, and I've been appointed patron of a city in Albion. And I've only been playing the game since December. Where's my Commendation? There isn't one, and it won't be coming any time soon, because these sorts of things aren't commendable. Other people have done all of those jobs (with the exception of MWP and Vice-Del of Spiritus, as I'm inaugural and incumbent). Being a regional legislator is nothing special, and Ministers come and go. The fact that you can use those sorts of things to argue for commending someone is a pretty clear indication that you're scrounging for material.

[Sedgistan]

Could the author detail the contributions that CD made to The Rejected Realms that amazed him so, please?

[Christian Democrats]

This is my first time to come to this forum in weeks, maybe months.

I usually don't notice Security Council proposals until they've been submitted.

As much as we would probably get along, not a chance. Evangelicalists make me sick, and that's what he sounds like.

Eww . . . evangelicalism . . .

[The Saint James Islands]

you can't vote against somebody being commended just because of their views.

Sure you can. You can vote against them for whatever reason you like. I'm voting against them because they didn't send me a Black Forest Torte on my birthday, and I really like Black Forest Tortes.

Do you want me to send you one on your birthday? Maybe just because? I'd be more than happy to.

I am sorry to say that I will be voting against due to the fact that CD has been a meanie-face to Frisbeeteria.

Opposed. Too conservative for my tastes.

Mine too, but you can't vote against somebody being commended just because of their views. I'm voting against because they've forced those views down my neck and they haven't done an awful lot else.

Well, again, you can vote against someone based on ideology... It's a pretty terrible reason to do so, though.

I would say I'm in 100% agreement with your rationale, though. It's not like CD has never written a good resolution, but more often than not I need to slap myself to make sure I'm not in some freakish nightmare.