NATION

PASSWORD

[Passed] Legalizing Prostitution

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.
User avatar
Flibbleites
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 6569
Founded: Jan 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

[Passed] Legalizing Prostitution

Postby Flibbleites » Wed Oct 05, 2011 11:38 am

Legalizing Prostitution

A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.


Category: Free Trade
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Great Azarath

Description: The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGING that prostitution, one of the oldest and most known professions in existence, is illegal in many member states;

CONCERNED that the criminalization of prostitution prevents prostitutes from adequately protecting themselves from abuse and disease, and that even in member states where prostitution is legal, prostitutes still may not be fully protected under current national laws;

CONVINCED that all individuals have a fundamental right to bodily sovereignty that no government can rightly violate;

DEFINES, for this resolution:
(1) Prostitution: As the act or practice of providing sexual services to another person (client) in return for compensation.
(2) Prostitute: Sapient beings who provide sexual services in return for compensation.
(3) Brothel: A organized place of prostitution.
(4) Sapient/Sapience: The ability of an organism or entity to act with judgment.

HEREBY MANDATES that all member states residing with the World Assembly legalize the business and free trade of prostitution within the confines of previously existent international law.

Prostitutes and member states that reside with the World Assembly MUST ABIDE to the following statements:
(1) Prostitutes are made fully aware of the health or other specific risk connected to prostitution;
(2) A prostitute has the right to refuse any sexual act;
(3) A prostitute has the right to create a contract with his/her/its client agreeing on specific details.

PROHIBITS the following:
(1) Sexual penetration to happen without some form of sexual protection, unless both sides consent to not using any form of sexual protection;
(2) Any government to stop a sapient being from acquiring this profession; within the confines of previously existent international law.

FURTHER PROHIBITS Individual member-states regulating prostitution-based enterprises to the point where it no longer becomes profitable for the enterprise, or its employees; member-states must also refrain from instilling negative ramifications on prostitutes for pursuing the profession with the intent of stymieing the industry.

This resolution RECOMMENDS the following:
(1) That member states provide free or low-cost, high quality condoms and other prophylactics, birth control and STI screenings to prostitutes and others who are at risk of STI's and unwanted pregnancies;
(2) Prostitutes are involved with organized brothels for better safety.

ENCOURAGES individual member states to impose additional protocol or standards that do not conflict with this resolution.

Co-Author: Connopolis
Last edited by Flibbleites on Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:07 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 05, 2011 11:40 am

All I have to say: Why Lord...even then, it won't pass! If it does, we'll ignore it and write the insta-repeal! Now I'll return to my office to recover from my hangover from last night's party at the Bar...

Martin Lin
Lanosian Ambassador to the World Assembly
Ambassador-Delegate to Democratic Republics

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

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Wed Oct 05, 2011 11:46 am

As I said, we will deliberately violate it (OOC: IC'ly). And if we do, it will be in good faith to keep organised crime down in the interest of public safety. We already know about compliance from day one, but the proposal does not make the world better other than increase crime. There is a limit to the idea of IntFed and I think the proposal goes outside of what is worthy of international consideration.

User avatar
Ploegeristan
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 8
Founded: Oct 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Ploegeristan » Wed Oct 05, 2011 11:53 am

We will support this legislation IF the following clause is added to the proposal: by law, prostitutes will have to test on STD's every 6 months at least. If a prostitute has an STD he or she will not be allowed to practice his or her profession until cured or in the case of HIV will be forced to stop practicing his or her profession for the rest of his or her life.

User avatar
Flibbleites
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 6569
Founded: Jan 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Flibbleites » Wed Oct 05, 2011 11:54 am

Ploegeristan wrote:We will support this legislation IF the following clause is added to the proposal: by law, prostitutes will have to test on STD's every 6 months at least. If a prostitute has an STD he or she will not be allowed to practice his or her profession until cured or in the case of HIV will be forced to stop practicing his or her profession for the rest of his or her life.

Considering it's already been submitted and has reached quorum, it's a little late to try and get anything changed.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

User avatar
Dilange
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7074
Founded: Mar 09, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Dilange » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:10 pm

Flibbleites wrote:Legalizing Prostitution

A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.


Category: Free Trade
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Great Azarath

Description: The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGING that prostitution, one of the oldest and most known professions in existence, is illegal in many member states;

CONCERNED that the criminalization of prostitution prevents prostitutes from adequately protecting themselves from abuse and disease, and that even in member states where prostitution is legal, prostitutes still may not be fully protected under current national laws;

CONVINCED that all individuals have a fundamental right to bodily sovereignty that no government can rightly violate;

DEFINES, for this resolution:
(1) Prostitution: As the act or practice of providing sexual services to another person (client) in return for compensation.
(2) Prostitute: Sapient beings who provide sexual services in return for compensation.
(3) Brothel: A organized place of prostitution.
(4) Sapient/Sapience: The ability of an organism or entity to act with judgment.

HEREBY MANDATES that all member states residing with the World Assembly legalize the business and free trade of prostitution within the confines of previously existent international law.

Prostitutes and member states that reside with the World Assembly MUST ABIDE to the following statements:
(1) Prostitutes are made fully aware of the health or other specific risk connected to prostitution;
(2) A prostitute has the right to refuse any sexual act;
(3) A prostitute has the right to create a contract with his/her/its client agreeing on specific details.

PROHIBITS the following:
(1) Sexual penetration to happen without some form of sexual protection, unless both sides consent to not using any form of sexual protection;
(2) Any government to stop a sapient being from acquiring this profession; within the confines of previously existent international law.

FURTHER PROHIBITS Individual member-states regulating prostitution-based enterprises to the point where it no longer becomes profitable for the enterprise, or its employees; member-states must also refrain from instilling negative ramifications on prostitutes for pursuing the profession with the intent of stymieing the industry.

This resolution RECOMMENDS the following:
(1) That member states provide free or low-cost, high quality condoms and other prophylactics, birth control and STI screenings to prostitutes and others who are at risk of STI's and unwanted pregnancies;
(2) Prostitutes are involved with organized brothels for better safety.

ENCOURAGES individual member states to impose additional protocol or standards that do not conflict with this resolution.

Co-Author: Connopolis


OOC: i remember telling him to make a discussion page but he refused so......apparently hes afraid of others opinions. idk.

"I see a vast amount of problems in this already. THe first is the clause stating that any government actions trying to limit prostitution is ILLEGAL. Oh...Im sorry but its my government and my country....the WA has no right telling countries how to limit businesses. "

"Second, If countries will not participate in prostitution but have it legalized whats the point, we should just have a proposal for the "Right to Fail". I wish the Azarite was here to discuss this with us but alas....he couldnt even reserve a room."

"Third, if the WA is not madating the creation of a prostiution industry....then what the hell is the point of this then? Im suppose to waste government money and efforts to do what again? Find every prostitute and brothel in the giant country of DIlange , test them for STDs, give them free condoms, and warn them of the health risks. This proposal isnt based in a realistic approach to the international community or business."

"Fourth, A few countries in the WA have government-mandated religion. Now, if one country had a religion that was against prostitution, would that count as a government-imposed regulation to make prostitution non-profitable? This proposal is riddled with more questions/redefitions then actual answers."

"Fellow World Assembly Delegates, I advise for you to vote against this ludicris proposal thats riddled with loopholes. This proposal single-handedly destroys nation's rights how to run business and how to regulate it so." Sainthos preached to the rest of the delegates in the WA.

User avatar
Christian Democrats
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9999
Founded: Jul 29, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby Christian Democrats » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:13 pm

AGAINST for reasons of morality and public health.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
GA#160: Forced Marriages Ban Act (79%)
GA#175: Organ and Blood Donations Act (68%)^
SC#082: Repeal "Liberate Catholic" (80%)
GA#200: Foreign Marriage Recognition (54%)
GA#213: Privacy Protection Act (70%)
GA#231: Marital Rape Justice Act (81%)^
GA#233: Ban Profits on Workers' Deaths (80%)*
GA#249: Stopping Suicide Seeds (70%)^
GA#253: Repeal "Freedom in Medical Research" (76%)
GA#285: Assisted Suicide Act (70%)
GA#310: Disabled Voters Act (81%)
GA#373: Repeal "Convention on Execution" (54%)

* denotes coauthorship
^ repealed resolution
#360: Electile Dysfunction
#452: Foetal Furore
#560: Bicameral Backlash
#570: Clerical Errors

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:13 pm

Yea...that. Mandatory STD tests?

Oh wait, it's already in there. But wait! If we go by the recommendation of mandating STD tests, could that be seen as imposing a burden on said industry?

The fuck...?

User avatar
Dilange
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7074
Founded: Mar 09, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Dilange » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:14 pm

The Republic of Lanos wrote:Yea...that. Mandatory STD tests?

Oh wait, it's already in there. But wait! If we go by the recommendation of mandating STD tests, could that be seen as imposing a burden on said industry?

The fuck...?


OOC: Reread my post, it sums it up the best.

User avatar
Christian Democrats
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9999
Founded: Jul 29, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby Christian Democrats » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:16 pm

The Republic of Lanos wrote:Mandatory STD tests
. . . are not in the proposal.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
GA#160: Forced Marriages Ban Act (79%)
GA#175: Organ and Blood Donations Act (68%)^
SC#082: Repeal "Liberate Catholic" (80%)
GA#200: Foreign Marriage Recognition (54%)
GA#213: Privacy Protection Act (70%)
GA#231: Marital Rape Justice Act (81%)^
GA#233: Ban Profits on Workers' Deaths (80%)*
GA#249: Stopping Suicide Seeds (70%)^
GA#253: Repeal "Freedom in Medical Research" (76%)
GA#285: Assisted Suicide Act (70%)
GA#310: Disabled Voters Act (81%)
GA#373: Repeal "Convention on Execution" (54%)

* denotes coauthorship
^ repealed resolution
#360: Electile Dysfunction
#452: Foetal Furore
#560: Bicameral Backlash
#570: Clerical Errors

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:17 pm

Christian Democrats wrote:
The Republic of Lanos wrote:Mandatory STD tests
. . . are not in the proposal.


Oh yes they are...but recommended:
This resolution RECOMMENDS the following:
(1) That member states provide free or low-cost, high quality condoms and other prophylactics, birth control and STI screenings to prostitutes and others who are at risk of STI's and unwanted pregnancies;

User avatar
Suidwes-Afrika
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1212
Founded: May 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Suidwes-Afrika » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:17 pm

Charlotte Ryberg wrote:As I said, we will deliberately violate it (OOC: IC'ly). And if we do, it will be in good faith to keep organised crime down in the interest of public safety. We already know about compliance from day one, but the proposal does not make the world better other than increase crime. There is a limit to the idea of IntFed and I think the proposal goes outside of what is worthy of international consideration.


This. We're not going to have such a can of worms again.
Die Kaplyn - Bok van Blerk

The Struggle against Apartheid in Suidwes-Afrika: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=135846

"No man has a right to do what he pleases, except when he pleases to do right." - Charles Simmons

"Violent and brutal means can only lead to totalitarian and tyrannical ends." - P.W. Botha

User avatar
Christian Democrats
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9999
Founded: Jul 29, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby Christian Democrats » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:19 pm

The Republic of Lanos wrote:
Christian Democrats wrote:. . . are not in the proposal.


Oh yes they are...but recommended:
This resolution RECOMMENDS the following:
(1) That member states provide free or low-cost, high quality condoms and other prophylactics, birth control and STI screenings to prostitutes and others who are at risk of STI's and unwanted pregnancies;

:palm: recommended ≠ mandatory
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
GA#160: Forced Marriages Ban Act (79%)
GA#175: Organ and Blood Donations Act (68%)^
SC#082: Repeal "Liberate Catholic" (80%)
GA#200: Foreign Marriage Recognition (54%)
GA#213: Privacy Protection Act (70%)
GA#231: Marital Rape Justice Act (81%)^
GA#233: Ban Profits on Workers' Deaths (80%)*
GA#249: Stopping Suicide Seeds (70%)^
GA#253: Repeal "Freedom in Medical Research" (76%)
GA#285: Assisted Suicide Act (70%)
GA#310: Disabled Voters Act (81%)
GA#373: Repeal "Convention on Execution" (54%)

* denotes coauthorship
^ repealed resolution
#360: Electile Dysfunction
#452: Foetal Furore
#560: Bicameral Backlash
#570: Clerical Errors

User avatar
Dilange
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7074
Founded: Mar 09, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Dilange » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:19 pm

The Republic of Lanos wrote:
Christian Democrats wrote:. . . are not in the proposal.


Oh yes they are...but recommended:
This resolution RECOMMENDS the following:
(1) That member states provide free or low-cost, high quality condoms and other prophylactics, birth control and STI screenings to prostitutes and others who are at risk of STI's and unwanted pregnancies;


"Oh as the Azarite said it, its mandatory and if you dont do it, its against his proposal....he clearly mentions that a few times in the old discussion." Sainthos smirked.

User avatar
Dilange
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7074
Founded: Mar 09, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Dilange » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:26 pm

Charlotte Ryberg wrote:As I said, we will deliberately violate it (OOC: IC'ly). And if we do, it will be in good faith to keep organised crime down in the interest of public safety. We already know about compliance from day one, but the proposal does not make the world better other than increase crime. There is a limit to the idea of IntFed and I think the proposal goes outside of what is worthy of international consideration.


"Agreed, the Azarite delegate seems to believe that if its passed that every country will be like his, no problems and more business freedoms. Alas, not every nation is similar. Each nation is complex and has a set of different variables that make it complex. Making a one-size-fits-all proposal doesnt work in an international zone of government and can cause a vast amoutn of nations in the Wa ranging from crime to bankrupcy. We have seen similar ones like this in the past filled with many contradictions. If this does pass, I will make a repal ASAP"

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:27 pm

Dilange wrote:
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:As I said, we will deliberately violate it (OOC: IC'ly). And if we do, it will be in good faith to keep organised crime down in the interest of public safety. We already know about compliance from day one, but the proposal does not make the world better other than increase crime. There is a limit to the idea of IntFed and I think the proposal goes outside of what is worthy of international consideration.


"Agreed, the Azarite delegate seems to believe that if its passed that every country will be like his, no problems and more business freedoms. Alas, not every nation is similar. Each nation is complex and has a set of different variables that make it complex. Making a one-size-fits-all proposal doesnt work in an international zone of government and can cause a vast amoutn of nations in the Wa ranging from crime to bankrupcy. We have seen similar ones like this in the past filled with many contradictions. If this does pass, I will make a repal ASAP"


We shall help you make the repeal, but now let's keep to trying to defeat this disaster before it spreads.

User avatar
Herttora
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 161
Founded: Aug 09, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Herttora » Wed Oct 05, 2011 1:23 pm

OOC: Wow how much bs had to go on in the background for this to get that many approvals... Sold wives? Nuclear technology?

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Wed Oct 05, 2011 1:28 pm

Herttora wrote:OOC: Wow how much bs had to go on in the background for this to get that many approvals... Sold wives? Nuclear technology?



I'm simply assuming that they the majority doesn't hold the GA's moral sentiments.

Yours in selling wives and nuclear technology,
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Flibbleites
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 6569
Founded: Jan 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Flibbleites » Wed Oct 05, 2011 1:45 pm

Dilange wrote:OOC: i remember telling him to make a discussion page but he refused so......apparently hes afraid of others opinions. idk.
OOC: Considering what happened last time I don't blame him.[/quote]

User avatar
Of Free Northern States
Envoy
 
Posts: 289
Founded: Oct 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Of Free Northern States » Wed Oct 05, 2011 1:56 pm

I say why not! It simply brings it out of the dark and into the light where it can be regulated and made safe! I support this resolution

User avatar
Suidwes-Afrika
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1212
Founded: May 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Suidwes-Afrika » Wed Oct 05, 2011 1:56 pm

Dilange wrote:
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:As I said, we will deliberately violate it (OOC: IC'ly). And if we do, it will be in good faith to keep organised crime down in the interest of public safety. We already know about compliance from day one, but the proposal does not make the world better other than increase crime. There is a limit to the idea of IntFed and I think the proposal goes outside of what is worthy of international consideration.


"Agreed, the Azarite delegate seems to believe that if its passed that every country will be like his, no problems and more business freedoms. Alas, not every nation is similar. Each nation is complex and has a set of different variables that make it complex. Making a one-size-fits-all proposal doesnt work in an international zone of government and can cause a vast amoutn of nations in the Wa ranging from crime to bankrupcy. We have seen similar ones like this in the past filled with many contradictions. If this does pass, I will make a repal ASAP"


We pledge every ourselves to this. As a country currently suffering from a staggering AIDS epidemic, we will do anything to ensure that this opinion ^^ is made clear to everyone in the WA.

Remember, leaders, you're not merely voting for what YOU would like to do. You are voting for what you want the REST OF THE WA to do, and should represent the best interests of the community as a whole.
Die Kaplyn - Bok van Blerk

The Struggle against Apartheid in Suidwes-Afrika: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=135846

"No man has a right to do what he pleases, except when he pleases to do right." - Charles Simmons

"Violent and brutal means can only lead to totalitarian and tyrannical ends." - P.W. Botha

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:05 pm

How about we legalize incest while we're on the topic of letting immorality come to our nations.

And we don't sell wives. That's sexual slavery and rightfully banned in Lanos. Now don't you start on a crusade to legalize that too...

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:10 pm

The Republic of Lanos wrote:How about we legalize incest while we're on the topic of letting immorality come to our nations.

And we don't sell wives. That's sexual slavery and rightfully banned in Lanos. Now don't you start on a crusade to legalize that too...


Your Excellency, while I acknowledge the fact that incest is viewed as immoral, that is most certainly not the universal point of view. The same applies to prostitution; one cannot simply state it's immoral, and vote against it, especially when it is not obscure, nor solely advocated by outliers.

Yours,
Last edited by Connopolis on Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Christian Democrats
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9999
Founded: Jul 29, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby Christian Democrats » Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:44 pm

The Republic of Lanos wrote:How about we legalize incest while we're on the topic of letting immorality come to our nations.

:( Incest is already legal in General Assembly law.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
GA#160: Forced Marriages Ban Act (79%)
GA#175: Organ and Blood Donations Act (68%)^
SC#082: Repeal "Liberate Catholic" (80%)
GA#200: Foreign Marriage Recognition (54%)
GA#213: Privacy Protection Act (70%)
GA#231: Marital Rape Justice Act (81%)^
GA#233: Ban Profits on Workers' Deaths (80%)*
GA#249: Stopping Suicide Seeds (70%)^
GA#253: Repeal "Freedom in Medical Research" (76%)
GA#285: Assisted Suicide Act (70%)
GA#310: Disabled Voters Act (81%)
GA#373: Repeal "Convention on Execution" (54%)

* denotes coauthorship
^ repealed resolution
#360: Electile Dysfunction
#452: Foetal Furore
#560: Bicameral Backlash
#570: Clerical Errors

User avatar
Goobergunchia
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 1623
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Goobergunchia » Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:46 pm

[OOC: In accordance with my revised RP policy following the trainwreck of a thread that was "Condemn Hippostania", I will be IGNORING any claims of non-compliance by World Assembly member nations as godmodding. Ambassadors stating otherwise will be treated as lying. As always, creative interpretations of resolutions are completely acceptable.]

The Republic of Lanos wrote:All I have to say: Why Lord...even then, it won't pass! If it does, we'll ignore it and write the insta-repeal! Now I'll return to my office to recover from my hangover from last night's party at the Bar...


We are depressed to see how pathetic the opposition to this resolution is. We suggest that the Lanosian ambassador make a bona fide attempt to defeat the resolution at vote. As always, we will oppose any InstaRepeal attempts unless new evidence is presented during the vote that would have substantially altered the original outcome.

Charlotte Ryberg wrote:There is a limit to the idea of IntFed and I think the proposal goes outside of what is worthy of international consideration.


As always, we affirm that there are no limits to what the World Assembly can pass except those enforced by the Secretariat. Resolutions should be judged on the simple question of whether or not they are a good idea from a policy perspective. As we have not yet had sufficient time to review this resolution, the Liberal Unitary Republic does not yet have an opinion on its merits. We encourage ambassadors who have already made up their minds to have a vigorous debate on the policy implications of the resolution.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian UN WA Ambassador
Citizen of the Rejected Realms

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads