NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Repeal "In Regards to Cloning"

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.

CAG?

FOR
42
22%
FOR, but this is a different FOR, this is a clone.
26
13%
AGAINST
23
12%
Clone of AGAINST
11
6%
Abstain
10
5%
Refrain, not an exact clone of "abstain", but similar.
9
5%
This is one of those "old guy" polls and I refuse to vote in it.
16
8%
I wish the Thessadorian ambassador had a clone....
19
10%
CAG!
20
10%
CAG?
17
9%
 
Total votes : 193

User avatar
Destructor Bunnies
Envoy
 
Posts: 242
Founded: Nov 21, 2007
Father Knows Best State

[PASSED] Repeal "In Regards to Cloning"

Postby Destructor Bunnies » Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:19 am

CAG!

GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION AT VOTE
Repeal "In Regards to Cloning"

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation


Category: Repeal


Resolution: GA#142


Proposed by: Parallaxium

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #142: In Regards to Cloning (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: While the General Assembly recognises the intent behind Resolution #142, “In Regards to Cloning”, it notes the following flaw:

The Resolution specifically:
“DEFINES clone as 'the organism that is an exact genetic copy of another'”

The wording used includes organisms that reproduce naturally in a number of ways in the definition of 'clone'.

Examples of organisms included in the definition are:
Any organism which reproduces by binary fission, in which the parent organsim divides into two genetically identical offspring.
Any organism which reproduces through budding, in which a genetically identical offspring grows off a ‘mother’ organism.
Any plant which reproduces by vegetative reproduction, in which a genetically identical plant grows from the leaf, runner, or rhizome of another plant, or from the stem of a damaged plant, or from new shoots on an existing root system, or arise from tubers or bulbs.
Any organism which reproduces through asexual sporogenesis, in which a genetically identical offspring develops from a mitospore after dispersal.
Any organism which reproduces through fragmentation, in which genetically identical offspring from fragments of the parent organism.
Any organism which reproduce through parthenogenesis, in which the female of a species produces genetically identical offspring from an unfertilised egg.
Any organism undergoing asexual reproduction, not mentioned in the list above.

Based on this definition of cloning, General Assembly Resolution #142 “In Regards to Cloning” is rendered in a different sense than that in which it was meant.

For the above reason, the World Assembly hereby repeals “In Regards to Cloning”.


I couldn't find a drafting thread for this. If there is one, or the author would like to make his own "At Vote" thread, then I guess this can be locked. If I'm feeling industrious later I might make a poll.
Last edited by Sedgistan on Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:04 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Jankenjin
Diplomat
 
Posts: 971
Founded: Oct 30, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Jankenjin » Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:57 am

Putting the "Insta" in "Insta-Repeal". We're for this--the proposal as written was terribly flawed and should be re-thought.

Yasushipa Toruhayashipa
Ambassador Plenepotentiary
Triune Republic of Jankenjin
Yes, we have a Factbook, for all those odd facts about this bunch of weird aliens.

User avatar
Cool Egg Sandwich
Diplomat
 
Posts: 795
Founded: Sep 04, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Cool Egg Sandwich » Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:39 am

Jankenjin wrote:Putting the "Insta" in "Insta-Repeal". We're for this--the proposal as written was terribly flawed and should be re-thought.

Yasushipa Toruhayashipa
Ambassador Plenepotentiary
Triune Republic of Jankenjin


I'm willing to admit when I put forth a poor resolution, and in this case, "In Regards to Cloning" was rather poor. I am in full support of this repeal in order to properly legislate clones' rights/sapient rights.

Rgds.,
Mr. Mickey Darke,
Ambassador to the World Assembly from Cool Egg Sandwich

WA Delegate from The Dirty South
Phish phan and Student of History
Member of NatSov 2.0
Author
: GAR #139, GAR #152 (Repeal)

User avatar
Blahem
Envoy
 
Posts: 322
Founded: Mar 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Blahem » Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:49 am

Obviously voted for repeal. :clap:
Matt is a left moderate social authoritarian. He is also a slight non-interventionist and culturally liberal. Matt's scores (from 0 to 10):
Economic issues: +7.22 left
Social issues: +1.51 authoritarian
Foreign policy: +2.45 non-interventionist
Cultural identification: +6.02 liberal

Rhodmhire wrote:Well I'm sure that sooner or later you good denizens of Ohio will be able to convince Mr. Boehner (heh) to put a good word in so that you can start erecting (heh) some of those bars in Ohio, and maybe someday soon your State will think long (heh) and hard (heh) about legalizing same-sex and/or gator marriage all together.

User avatar
Trolleborg
Attaché
 
Posts: 82
Founded: Oct 11, 2010
New York Times Democracy

Postby Trolleborg » Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:22 pm

It is very interesting, that many resolutions regularly voted with solid "for" and shortly thereafter were repealed with no less solid majority.

User avatar
Blahem
Envoy
 
Posts: 322
Founded: Mar 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Blahem » Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:25 pm

Trolleborg wrote:It is very interesting, that many resolutions regularly voted with solid "for" and shortly thereafter were repealed with no less solid majority.


I noticed that too. Delegates who approved my repeal were sometimes those who voted for "In Regards to Cloning". I wonder if people vote "Yes" just for the sake of voting "Yes". :eyebrow:
Matt is a left moderate social authoritarian. He is also a slight non-interventionist and culturally liberal. Matt's scores (from 0 to 10):
Economic issues: +7.22 left
Social issues: +1.51 authoritarian
Foreign policy: +2.45 non-interventionist
Cultural identification: +6.02 liberal

Rhodmhire wrote:Well I'm sure that sooner or later you good denizens of Ohio will be able to convince Mr. Boehner (heh) to put a good word in so that you can start erecting (heh) some of those bars in Ohio, and maybe someday soon your State will think long (heh) and hard (heh) about legalizing same-sex and/or gator marriage all together.

User avatar
The FTR
Minister
 
Posts: 2059
Founded: Mar 15, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby The FTR » Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:26 pm

I don't think it should be repealed. You know why? Cloning is a good idea. Cloning increases output, and output increases the economy.
I'll respond to a lot of titles, but I preferred to go by Forest.

Unless stated otherwise, I have disowned all of the posts, both in and out of character, that I made years ago. I would like to think that both my real, out-of-character behavior and my in-character role-playing skills have matured.

User avatar
Blahem
Envoy
 
Posts: 322
Founded: Mar 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Blahem » Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:29 pm

The FTR wrote:I don't think it should be repealed. You know why? Cloning is a good idea. Cloning increases output, and output increases the economy.


I don't think these repeals are as against cloning in general as they're against the wording of the legislation.
Matt is a left moderate social authoritarian. He is also a slight non-interventionist and culturally liberal. Matt's scores (from 0 to 10):
Economic issues: +7.22 left
Social issues: +1.51 authoritarian
Foreign policy: +2.45 non-interventionist
Cultural identification: +6.02 liberal

Rhodmhire wrote:Well I'm sure that sooner or later you good denizens of Ohio will be able to convince Mr. Boehner (heh) to put a good word in so that you can start erecting (heh) some of those bars in Ohio, and maybe someday soon your State will think long (heh) and hard (heh) about legalizing same-sex and/or gator marriage all together.

User avatar
Destructor Bunnies
Envoy
 
Posts: 242
Founded: Nov 21, 2007
Father Knows Best State

Postby Destructor Bunnies » Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:43 pm

The FTR wrote:Cloning is a good idea.


Nobody is saying it's a bad idea, they're just opposed to the wording of "In Regards to Cloning". I imagine there will be a replacement submitted at some point in the future.

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sat Mar 26, 2011 1:11 pm

What's a CAG?

Anyway, Ms. Harper is in favour.

User avatar
Cool Egg Sandwich
Diplomat
 
Posts: 795
Founded: Sep 04, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Cool Egg Sandwich » Sat Mar 26, 2011 1:14 pm

Destructor Bunnies wrote:
The FTR wrote:Cloning is a good idea.


Nobody is saying it's a bad idea, they're just opposed to the wording of "In Regards to Cloning". I imagine there will be a replacement submitted at some point in the future.


Well, depending on what happens in the near future with Bears Armed's "Rights for Intelligent Beings", there may be no need for a replacement draft for clones, in particular.

I sincerely hope for this body to legislate to protect basic human rights for all sapient beings, clones included. I'm just not sure we really need another resolution on clones, since it appears that all 'intelligent' [sapient] beings will have basic human rights in the near future.

Of course, this all depends on the Ambassador from Bears Armed.

Rgds.,
Mr. Mickey Darke,
Ambassador to the World Assembly from Cool Egg Sandwich

WA Delegate from The Dirty South
Phish phan and Student of History
Member of NatSov 2.0
Author
: GAR #139, GAR #152 (Repeal)

User avatar
The Travuersan Union
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Jun 09, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The Travuersan Union » Sat Mar 26, 2011 1:25 pm

DEFINES cloning as 'the creation of an organism that is an exact genetic copy of another'
DEFINES clone as 'the organism that is an exact genetic copy of another'

RECOGNIZES the risk of cloning mistakes,
URGES nations to take steps to prevent cloning mishaps,
REQUIRES that cloning only be done by trained professionals,
DECLARES that nations cannot classify sentient sapient clones as their own legal class,
REQUIRES sapient clones in member nations be extended all the legal rights, privileges, and opportunities granted to their genetically identical counterparts,
DECLARES that clones cannot be used for the purpose of or as part of a violation of other GA resolutions,

AFFIRMS the right of nations to pursue cloning of sapient beings,
PRESERVES the right of nations to illegalize such cloning in that nation,
REMINDS that nations are allowed to enact further legislation in regards to clones, so long as it does not violate this act,
Co-authored by Cool Egg Sandwich

I thought I'd put the original resolution here. The underlined portions are the only parts of this resolution that force action by a member nation.
NERVUN wrote:Just to correct you, there are a number of nations RPing Nazism. We don't ban that. We do ban the swastikas because, again, they do nothing but cause trouble.

Nazism does not cause trouble? A symbol is worse than an ACT?
"It's okay to pretend to kill millions, just don't symbolize it."
"I'll be over here, killing millions, without a symbol. I'm sure that's o.k. for Nation States."

User avatar
Blahem
Envoy
 
Posts: 322
Founded: Mar 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Blahem » Sat Mar 26, 2011 2:10 pm

Cool Egg Sandwich wrote:
Destructor Bunnies wrote:
Nobody is saying it's a bad idea, they're just opposed to the wording of "In Regards to Cloning". I imagine there will be a replacement submitted at some point in the future.


Well, depending on what happens in the near future with Bears Armed's "Rights for Intelligent Beings", there may be no need for a replacement draft for clones, in particular.

I sincerely hope for this body to legislate to protect basic human rights for all sapient beings, clones included. I'm just not sure we really need another resolution on clones, since it appears that all 'intelligent' [sapient] beings will have basic human rights in the near future.

Of course, this all depends on the Ambassador from Bears Armed.

Rgds.,


What about unintelligent beings? :P
Matt is a left moderate social authoritarian. He is also a slight non-interventionist and culturally liberal. Matt's scores (from 0 to 10):
Economic issues: +7.22 left
Social issues: +1.51 authoritarian
Foreign policy: +2.45 non-interventionist
Cultural identification: +6.02 liberal

Rhodmhire wrote:Well I'm sure that sooner or later you good denizens of Ohio will be able to convince Mr. Boehner (heh) to put a good word in so that you can start erecting (heh) some of those bars in Ohio, and maybe someday soon your State will think long (heh) and hard (heh) about legalizing same-sex and/or gator marriage all together.

User avatar
Cool Egg Sandwich
Diplomat
 
Posts: 795
Founded: Sep 04, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Cool Egg Sandwich » Sat Mar 26, 2011 3:12 pm

Blahem wrote:
Cool Egg Sandwich wrote:
Well, depending on what happens in the near future with Bears Armed's "Rights for Intelligent Beings", there may be no need for a replacement draft for clones, in particular.

I sincerely hope for this body to legislate to protect basic human rights for all sapient beings, clones included. I'm just not sure we really need another resolution on clones, since it appears that all 'intelligent' [sapient] beings will have basic human rights in the near future.

Of course, this all depends on the Ambassador from Bears Armed.

Rgds.,


What about unintelligent beings? :P


Please keep the discussion on-topic with this repeal, my good man.

To answer your question, "Rights for Intelligent Beings" is merely the title. The legislation itself provides for rights for all 'sapient' beings. It has nothing to do with their IQ, really. That is merely a title that more people are familiar with; it seems to me that most people don't really know the difference between sentience and sapience.

All in all, the title just helps 'focus' most people's attention on a familiar idea. :p

Rgds.,
Mr. Mickey Darke,
Ambassador to the World Assembly from Cool Egg Sandwich

WA Delegate from The Dirty South
Phish phan and Student of History
Member of NatSov 2.0
Author
: GAR #139, GAR #152 (Repeal)

User avatar
Darenjo
Minister
 
Posts: 2178
Founded: Mar 31, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Darenjo » Sat Mar 26, 2011 3:16 pm

If this fails, I'll vote for Bharam's repeal.

I want IRtC repealed, but I don't want a bad repeal for a bad resolution.
Dr. Park Si-Jung, Ambassador to the World Assembly for The People's Democracy of Darenjo

Proud Member of Eastern Islands of Dharma!

User avatar
Mahaj WA Seat
Minister
 
Posts: 2091
Founded: Nov 03, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Mahaj WA Seat » Sat Mar 26, 2011 7:12 pm

Of course, its custom to vote against a repeal, just because. Or at least, of your own resolution. That's what i've done. But of Course i'll work with CES to make it better.

However, the current resolution is shoddy, to me. I like Blahem's repeal much better.
Member of The South and Osiris
Representing Mahaj in the World Assembly.
The Mahaj Factbook.


Author of Missing Minors Act (Repealed) and In Regards to Cloning
Mike the Progressive wrote:
Brogavia wrote:Fuck bitches, get money.
You shall be my god.

Georgism wrote:Fuck off you cunt, I'm always nice.

NERVUN wrote:Yog zap!

Cool Egg Sandwich wrote:I am the Urinater..... I'll be back.

Jedi Utopians wrote:5) Now, saying that a nation couldn't be part of OPEC would be bold. AIPEC sounds like something you'd want to get checked out by a physician for.


User avatar
Cool Egg Sandwich
Diplomat
 
Posts: 795
Founded: Sep 04, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Cool Egg Sandwich » Sat Mar 26, 2011 7:15 pm

Mahaj WA Seat wrote:Of course, its custom to vote against a repeal, just because. Or at least, of your own resolution. That's what i've done. But of Course i'll work with CES to make it better.

However, the current resolution is shoddy, to me. I like Blahem's repeal much better.


I agree that Blahem's draft is probably better. I don't necessarily think it's imperative to produce a replacement for this resolution, though. As I mentioned previously, Bears Armed's draft, "Rights for Intelligent Beings" would cover all sapient beings, and therefore legislation on clones, in particular, would not be necessary.

Plus, it would give nations some more time with their 'genetically altered clone armies'. Those are going to be tough to give up after all this time.

Saludos,
Last edited by Cool Egg Sandwich on Sat Mar 26, 2011 7:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mr. Mickey Darke,
Ambassador to the World Assembly from Cool Egg Sandwich

WA Delegate from The Dirty South
Phish phan and Student of History
Member of NatSov 2.0
Author
: GAR #139, GAR #152 (Repeal)

User avatar
Mousebumples
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 8443
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Mousebumples » Sat Mar 26, 2011 8:16 pm

Since this repeal is aimed at striking a resolution I don't care for from the books, I have voted IN FAVOR.
Leader of the Mouse-a-rific Mousetastic Moderator Mousedom of Mousebumples
Past WA Delegate for Europeia & Monkey Island
Proud Member of UNOG
I'm an "adorably marvelous NatSov" - Mallorea and Riva
GA Resolutions (sorted by category) | Why Repeal? | Reppy's Sig Workshop

User avatar
Monxcleyr
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 19
Founded: Mar 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Monxcleyr » Sat Mar 26, 2011 8:23 pm

The repeal is based on the original resolution not clearly defining a clone. Obviously everyone knew that was referring to humans. But, of course, you can't leave assumptions in resolutions, because you get trolls who will go on about rights for their flowers. I get that. At the same token, the original resolution, this repeal, define what an organism is. No other resolution does either. So surely, if a word not being defined is grounds for a repeal, then this repeal isn't valid itself. I know someone will say, "We all know what an organism is, don't nitpick.", or something along those lines. But a member nation could have some ridiculous definition for an organism, or even just a slightly different one. So if this repeal is based on how other organisms reproduce, shouldn't we also define what an organism is exactly?

Also, this repeal is not needed. Let's look back at the original resolution, shall we?
REQUIRES sapient clones in member nations be extended all the legal rights, privileges, and opportunities granted to their genetically identical counterparts,


So, for example, bacteria reproduce by splitting, and their offspring are clones, which this repeal clearly states. Bacteria don't have legal rights. (Unless a member nation has such laws in place, which again, the original resolution didn't interfere with) So, the bacteria still wouldn't have rights.
That was actually a rather neat and simple failsafe in the original resolution. Unless of course this is being repealed only because it's missing a definition, at which point you should see my first part.

Also, on a sidenote, it's too bad people vote 'for' resolutions for the sake of voting for them. Otherwise we wouldn't waste time passing repeal after repeal, trying to repeal things that shouldn't have passed. Same goes for repeals, too. Too much coincidence watching bills pass then get repealed with about the same majority. Unfortunately only a small part of WA seems to actually read through things before voting.
Last edited by Monxcleyr on Sat Mar 26, 2011 8:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Pehzinho
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Mar 23, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Pehzinho » Sat Mar 26, 2011 8:40 pm

We cannot just ement the resolution at all? Or we need to repeal an then do another with the right text?
Last edited by Pehzinho on Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jankenjin
Diplomat
 
Posts: 971
Founded: Oct 30, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Jankenjin » Sat Mar 26, 2011 9:03 pm

Pehzinho wrote:Whe cannot just ement the resolution at all? Or we need to repeal an then do another with the right text?


Unfortunately, amendments aren't allowed, as the game mechanics would quickly get snarled if only part of a resolution were operable. A pity, though, it would make for some more creative legislation.
Yes, we have a Factbook, for all those odd facts about this bunch of weird aliens.

User avatar
Ineave
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Dec 22, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Ineave » Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:48 am

This repeal is ridiculous. There is no need for further clarification. It feels similar to something being repealed because it is missing a period. Come on now.

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 19054
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:30 am

Cool Egg Sandwich wrote:Well, depending on what happens in the near future with Bears Armed's "Rights for Intelligent Beings", there may be no need for a replacement draft for clones, in particular.

I sincerely hope for this body to legislate to protect basic human rights for all sapient beings, clones included. I'm just not sure we really need another resolution on clones, since it appears that all 'intelligent' [sapient] beings will have basic human rights in the near future.

Of course, this all depends on the Ambassador from Bears Armed.


OOC: I'll probably have enough time available to finish work on it, and maybe to submit it (if its legality can be checked, against the claims of superfluousness that a certain person has already raised...) too, week-after-next.

Of course, though, my last two proposals that reached quorum were voted down... :(


Ineave wrote:This repeal is ridiculous. There is no need for further clarification. It feels similar to something being repealed because it is missing a period. Come on now.

If that punctuation error made a signifiant (and unwanted) change to the proposal's meaning then why not repeal it? There was actually one "historical" resolution, on Education, in which a misplaced apostrophe accidentally channeled all of the financial aid involved to the author's own nation...
:roll:
Last edited by Bears Armed on Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
Mahaj WA Seat
Minister
 
Posts: 2091
Founded: Nov 03, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Mahaj WA Seat » Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:11 am

The problem here is that the resolution doesn't even address all of the points in the resolution, it addresses one bit, and its claim that it changes the meaning of the resolution is untrue. Those things aren't sapient.
Member of The South and Osiris
Representing Mahaj in the World Assembly.
The Mahaj Factbook.


Author of Missing Minors Act (Repealed) and In Regards to Cloning
Mike the Progressive wrote:
Brogavia wrote:Fuck bitches, get money.
You shall be my god.

Georgism wrote:Fuck off you cunt, I'm always nice.

NERVUN wrote:Yog zap!

Cool Egg Sandwich wrote:I am the Urinater..... I'll be back.

Jedi Utopians wrote:5) Now, saying that a nation couldn't be part of OPEC would be bold. AIPEC sounds like something you'd want to get checked out by a physician for.


User avatar
Costa Celestia
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: Mar 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Costa Celestia » Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:41 am

The Principality of Costa Celestia hereby votes to repeal this legislation. The ambassador of CC; Miss Andreaa Lupei believes this legislation needs rethinking.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads