[PASSED] Invasive Species Response Act

[Bergnovinaia]

Unfortunately, the proposal is in queue and now will be up to the whole WA to decide of they like the proposal, or if its time to go back to the drawing board.

In the Name of the Eternal Kawaii, may the Cute One be praised

It is our recommendation, then, that this proposal be voted down, so that the delegations from Icamera and Ceni can have the time to work on a version that is genuinely coauthored rather than having Ceni's name on a resolution they disagree with. An important topic such as this should not be rushed.

An a proposal that includes fungi as an invasive species.

[Christian Democrats]

Similar to how nations should have been capable of dealing with their own Marital Rape justice laws?

Hypocritical much?

Your responses to my posts almost never make sense, and they are usually off topic. I do not understand the point of these two questions. I never have believed that member states are capable of handling rape by themselves. This is why I wrote a resolution requiring member states to "eliminate all legal distinctions between marital rapes and nonmarital rapes occurring under otherwise identical circumstances." Then, my resolution was repealed on the basis of the absurd view that it "merely [threw] up legal barriers to marital rape without asserting a right to be free from it," an assertion that made absolutely no sense. Now, what were you trying to say?

[Damanucus]

Firstly, I would like to insist that the Icameran Diplomat please stop pestering us with the events that occur in that browser-based game called Real Life^TM. These documents to which you have presented us—and from that game, no doubt!—mean absolutely nothing in this esteemed committee.

But, with the point at hand, I must refer to one simple point in regards to this proposal:

DEFINES "invasive species" as any non-sapient plant or animal species posing a serious risk of rapid, uncontrolled, and detrimental population growth upon being introduced to a new environment;

INSTITUTES an international ban on the unregulated introduction of potential invasive species to nations in which said species are likely to overtake or displace indigenous flora and fauna;

While I applaud your definition and intention, I'm afraid I have to call you out on your INSTITUTES clause. Your choice to restrict your outlook to "potential invasive species" is actually the undoing of this resolution, as no-one can predict the impact of an introduced species within the borders of a nation (or even without, since many of our esteemed representative nations share borders). As a result, what may be perceived as "regulation" becomes unregulated by default.

Please leave this kind of thing in the hands of national customs officials, not of international bureaucrats.

Stephanie Orman
Representative, Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus

[Christian Democrats]

Please leave this kind of thing in the hands of national customs officials, not of international bureaucrats.

I applaud the ambassador of the Nomadic Peoples.

[United Federation of Canada]

Similar to how nations should have been capable of dealing with their own Marital Rape justice laws?

Hypocritical much?

Your responses to my posts almost never make sense, and they are usually off topic. I do not understand the point of these two questions. I never have believed that member states are capable of handling rape by themselves. This is why I wrote a resolution requiring member states to "eliminate all legal distinctions between marital rapes and nonmarital rapes occurring under otherwise identical circumstances." Then, my resolution was repealed on the basis of the absurd view that it "merely [threw] up legal barriers to marital rape without asserting a right to be free from it," an assertion that made absolutely no sense. Now, what were you trying to say?

You believe that nations are capable of handling an international issue internally.

You don't believe that nations are capable of handling domestic affairs without the WA holding their hand.

If it doesn't conform to the rules of the church, you oppose it.

What you are is a hypocrite.

Do you understand now, or should I break out the crayons?

The Federation casts its vote FOR this resolution.

[Damanucus]

Please leave this kind of thing in the hands of national customs officials, not of international bureaucrats.

I applaud the ambassador of the Nomadic Peoples.

Thank you, Esteemed Ambassador...I do apologise, a plant is blocking your nameplate.

I do hope, though, everyone listens.

Stephanie Orman
Representative, Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus

[Twin Earth]

Question: If one of my citizens accidentally brought in invasive plant matter into a different country through, say, a seed attached to his shoe, would he be in violation of this resolution? Would my country? The law seems to be aimed at private as well as public entities, and to be without exceptions...

[The Saturnian Republic]

Please leave this kind of thing in the hands of national customs officials, not of international bureaucrats.

I must wholeheartedly disagree with you here, Representative Orman. Invasive species are a huge international problem, destroying crops and ecosystems every day, causing famine, straining relief efforts, and devastating whole communities. A lack of a comprehensive regulation is, frankly, dangerous. With different laws worldwide with different levels of effectiveness and scope, it is easy for an invasive species to fall between the cracks. That said, this wasn't entirely ready and shouldn't have been submitted so quickly, in my opinion. There is the glaring fungus error that is now apparent to me, and maybe other technicalities that haven't yet been caught.

[Norway and Iceland]

Her Majesty the Queen has commanded me to inform the Assembly of her support for this proposal. It has a noble goal and is very well-written. Furthermore, we do not believe it to infringe on our national sovereignty.

[Anozia]

species posing a serious risk of rapid, uncontrolled, and detrimental population growth

Funny, we feel like we heard the same line from racists about outsiders.
Within a closed-enough nation, this resolution could definitely help to justify a genocide or major mistreatments.
With very little omissions, this can be applied to humans.

Based on the risks we can see within this text, Anozia is voting against this resolution.

[Discoveria]

Furthermore, I believe the definition of "invasive species" is flawed. It covers plants and animals but excludes fungi. For these reasons, I plan to vote against this proposal.

"The flawed definition is regrettable. I must also urge my region to vote against this proposal," said Matthew.

[The Black Hat Guy]

species posing a serious risk of rapid, uncontrolled, and detrimental population growth

Funny, we feel like we heard the same line from racists about outsiders.
Within a closed-enough nation, this resolution could definitely help to justify a genocide or major mistreatments.
With very little omissions, this can be applied to humans.

Based on the risks we can see within this text, Anozia is voting against this resolution.

The definition specifies non-sapient, and there are already other WA resolutions against genocide. Genocide is still illegal under WA laws, and this doesn't change that.

[Alqania]

Furthermore, I believe the definition of "invasive species" is flawed. It covers plants and animals but excludes fungi. For these reasons, I plan to vote against this proposal.

"The flawed definition is regrettable. I must also urge my region to vote against this proposal," said Matthew.

"The Queendom is delighted to concur with our most esteemed Delegate", agreed Princess Christine.

[Consumatia]

Esteemed members of this body,

We, the people of Consumatia, implore all nations which have already supported this resolution, and those yet to decide, to vote no.

It is true that our species -- like many others, including birds which fly thousands of miles -- sometimes inadvertently move a seed or spawn to a new home elsewhere on the globe. Indeed, this has been a key factor in the forces of natural selection for far longer than humanity has possessed opposable thumbs.

This we know as fact.

What we do not know, esteemed colleagues, is the impact of any decision of this body to attempt to regulate the forces of nature. Our lives are relatively short, and our decisions, try as we might to deny it, are thus lacking in both time and information, for us to understand their impacts. Invariably, when we tinker with things well beyond our control, it is our children's children's children who face the mess caused by such arrogance.

Nature is a dynamic, adaptive system, in which life always finds a way to continue given the variables it must face. Who are we to add additional factors? Who among us thought that adding MTBE to gasoline would clean the air but not hopelessly poison our water?

We humans must not toy with forces beyond our puny minds. This way is the path to folly, if not ruin. Reject this proposal, we again implore you.

[The Akashic Records]

We humans must not toy with forces beyond our puny minds. This way is the path to folly, if not ruin. Reject this proposal, we again implore you.

"We humans you say?" Coleman's android responded, without knowledge of the good ambassador, as he was too drunk after his binge drinking last night.

"You are aware that we have plants, bears, robots, and what have you the World Assembly, yes? In light of what no one, including my operator, bothered to point out prior to submission, and the drafting session, we are retracting our support, so that it may be improved."

[Christian Democrats]

If it doesn't conform to the rules of the church, you oppose it.

Of course. We have a state religion, and 98 percent of the population adheres to it.

What you are is a hypocrite.

You might find our delegation disagreeable, but it is certainly not hypocritical.

[Krankor]

Funny, we feel like we heard the same line from racists about outsiders.
Within a closed-enough nation, this resolution could definitely help to justify a genocide or major mistreatments.
With very little omissions, this can be applied to humans.

Based on the risks we can see within this text, Anozia is voting against this resolution.

The definition specifies non-sapient, and there are already other WA resolutions against genocide. Genocide is still illegal under WA laws, and this doesn't change that.

So all you have to do is define raiders as "non-sapient". Clever.

[The Saturnian Republic]

Esteemed members of this body,

We, the people of Consumatia, implore all nations which have already supported this resolution, and those yet to decide, to vote no.

It is true that our species -- like many others, including birds which fly thousands of miles -- sometimes inadvertently move a seed or spawn to a new home elsewhere on the globe. Indeed, this has been a key factor in the forces of natural selection for far longer than humanity has possessed opposable thumbs.

This we know as fact.

What we do not know, esteemed colleagues, is the impact of any decision of this body to attempt to regulate the forces of nature. Our lives are relatively short, and our decisions, try as we might to deny it, are thus lacking in both time and information, for us to understand their impacts. Invariably, when we tinker with things well beyond our control, it is our children's children's children who face the mess caused by such arrogance.

Nature is a dynamic, adaptive system, in which life always finds a way to continue given the variables it must face. Who are we to add additional factors? Who among us thought that adding MTBE to gasoline would clean the air but not hopelessly poison our water?

We humans must not toy with forces beyond our puny minds. This way is the path to folly, if not ruin. Reject this proposal, we again implore you.

You're aware this proposal is meant to limit the amount of invasive species that are transported from place to place by sapient species, that wouldn't be if sapient species didn't exist, right? The very purpose of this proposal at its core is to limit sapient interference in the course of nature, therefore allowing natural selection to continue as it normally would.

[The Seafield Islands]

The King, the Federal Executive Council, the Cabinet, the House of Nobles, the Senate, the Chamber of Commons, and the Federal Supreme Court, decided that the Seafield Islands shall vote FOR this resolution. The reason is not disclosed.

-Foreign Minister of the Seafield Islands

[Consumatia]

You're aware this proposal is meant to limit the amount of invasive species that are transported from place to place by sapient species, that wouldn't be if sapient species didn't exist, right? The very purpose of this proposal at its core is to limit sapient interference in the course of nature, therefore allowing natural selection to continue as it normally would.

We reviewed the proposal most carefully, and are aware of its tenets. It took little time to find fault in the implicit notion that sapient species are in some way divorced from nature. Organic life forms, even the intelligent ones, are part and parcel of the system from which they evolved. Natural selection is what created those sapient species in the first place! We embrace are place in the cosmos, and reject this resolution as being high-handed and shortsighted.

In short: a species being moved from one place to another may make it "invasive," but that is a part of nature, not a destruction of it. Consumatia is voting "no" on this poorly-considered resolution.

[The Saturnian Republic]

We reviewed the proposal most carefully, and are aware of its tenets. It took little time to find fault in the implicit notion that sapient species are in some way divorced from nature. Organic life forms, even the intelligent ones, are part and parcel of the system from which they evolved. Natural selection is what created those sapient species in the first place! We embrace are place in the cosmos, and reject this resolution as being high-handed and shortsighted.

In short: a species being moved from one place to another may make it "invasive," but that is a part of nature, not a destruction of it. Consumatia is voting "no" on this poorly-considered resolution.

Since you're so adamant about viewing sapient species as part of a natural process, look at it this way. Natural selection is a thing because the primary aim of any life form is to survive. Logically, us sapient species should want to to anything to keep ourselves alive. However, invasive species wipe out crops, livestock, and other food sources all the time. They are a threat on our survival, the most basic of our priorities, and they should be eliminated as such. Surely that's reason enough to not oppose this bill?

[The Eternal Kawaii]

If it doesn't conform to the rules of the church, you oppose it.

Of course. We have a state religion, and 98 percent of the population adheres to it.

What you are is a hypocrite.

You might find our delegation disagreeable, but it is certainly not hypocritical.

When, exactly, did a discussion about kudzu turn into a religious debate?

[The Black Hat Guy]

What we do not know, esteemed colleagues, is the impact of any decision of this body to attempt to regulate the forces of nature. Our lives are relatively short, and our decisions, try as we might to deny it, are thus lacking in both time and information, for us to understand their impacts. Invariably, when we tinker with things well beyond our control, it is our children's children's children who face the mess caused by such arrogance.

Nature is a dynamic, adaptive system, in which life always finds a way to continue given the variables it must face. Who are we to add additional factors? Who among us thought that adding MTBE to gasoline would clean the air but not hopelessly poison our water?

We humans must not toy with forces beyond our puny minds. This way is the path to folly, if not ruin. Reject this proposal, we again implore you.

So attempting to prevent human interference with nature is somehow interference with nature now?

So all you have to do is define raiders as "non-sapient". Clever.

Sapient has its own definition, and if raiders are attacking a country specifically with respect to territorial boundaries, or anything really, they are clearly sapient, regardless of what a WA member nation has to say about it.

[Alterrum]

FOR, nature doesn't recognize national borders so this issue needs international regulation, and while the wording isn't perfect, it's fine for me.

[Varrustan]

FOR, nature doesn't recognize national borders so this issue needs international regulation, and while the wording isn't perfect, it's fine for me.

Yes nature doesn't recognise national borders, but this isn't dealing with nature, this is dealing with sapient interference with nature, and last time I checked sapient beings do recognize national borders.
I personally find this proposal an outrageous infringement on my national sovereignty and see no reason for this legislation. Much like border control this is an issue for individual nations.