[Passed] Repeal "Animal Protection Act"

[The Dourian Embassy]

You do realize that countries most likely will not focus enough on animal protection if the international law doesn't force them, right?

I'm not making a judgement one way or another here, but do you have any evidence to back up that claim?

[The Two Jerseys]

Our official stance is thus, the current act whilst not perfect protects animals as a whole from abuse. Repealing the act opens the gate to mass abuse of animals. Perhaps a simple rewriting is in order.

For the 500,000th time: it don't work like that. If you want to change the law, you have to repeal it first.

[Republic Arcadia]

I'm not making a judgement one way or another here, but do you have any evidence to back up that claim?

Just the logical chain of considering that animal protection means restriction to both the economy and personal liberties and thus is is undesirable in most of the countries.

[The Dourian Embassy]

Just the logical chain of considering that animal protection means restriction to both the economy and personal liberties and thus is is undesirable in most of the countries.

But given that most nations have some laws on animal abuse, and literally every developed country does... I don't see that as a valid point.

[Separatist Peoples]

for those of you looking for a replacement draft to help, look no further. viewtopic.php?f=9&t=265036

Much like a recent feline representative pointed out, please don't try to pimp out your proposal in other threads.

[Republic of Coldwater]

Coldwater is for this resolution, but for a different reason that is stated in this Resolution. The World Assembly should not be regulating how people treat animals. Animals are not humans and don't need to have good treatment. Either way, animals are going to die whether or not we have regulations. Furthermore, treating animals in a kind fashion will cost more money, and that will be at the expense of the companies. With less money, they can hire less people and in developing nations which need lower unemployment, this will not help. Therefore, Coldwater is in favor of this resolution because of the damage it will do to developing nations and the fact that animals are not humans and will be killed and eaten anyway.

I yield the floor

[X10]

"If you want the true measure of a man, pay attention to how he treats his inferiors."

With all due respect, delegates, I feel that it is ridiculous that this is even on a ballot. Perhaps it is the short-sight of a dictator, believing that when something is correct, it matters not how many people would like to argue against it, it only matters that we cast the dart and proceed to the consequences.
It is my understanding, from the arguments I have read, that whether this repeal is a yea or a nay, it matters not. It seems as though one factions argues that it is important to say it out loud and the other faction disagrees saying that to speak the order would be wrong, but we can just assume that everyone will follow the intrinsic meaning behind such a legislation.
Assuredly, this is all just the idle speculation of a "psychotic" dictator who has already cast his vote for this repeal, but I would implore you, cast your vote, and allow the black or white of your descision, coupled with the nation that you are to the world, let them show your opinion, and move on to more important things.

domum constituerunt nigrum et album

[WA Kitty Kops]

Animals are not humans and don't need to have good treatment.

You is wrong. It is the human animals that are the problem. They have procera- pocrea- made too many more humans! And they kill things that are not toyed with enough after killing. And they do not give nearly enough cream, tuna and pettings!

[The Akashic Records]

Animals are not humans and don't need to have good treatment.

You is wrong. It is the human animals that are the problem. They have procera- pocrea- made too many more humans! And they kill things that are not toyed with enough after killing. And they do not give nearly enough cream, tuna and pettings!

We can agree to that, and if we go by the delegate of Coldwater's logic,

[...]Either way, animals are going to die whether or not we have regulations.[...]

doesn't that mean that humans don't need rights either?

On a more serious note, while rather ambivalent on this, I've decided to vote in favour of this repeal for a perhaps better replacement against animal cruelty. Though, I haven't the faintest idea on what to start on.

[Kadar]

im for it. I don't see why people would not want to protect animals.

[Humilite]

i

[Separatist Peoples]

May I ask a question here please because I am a newcomer and rather stupid perhaps?
To repel a resolution,means it is no more valid, right? Therefore, repelling "Animal Protection Act", though it far from perfect, means there is NO resolution that favors the protection of Animals! So we leave animals out of protection here...
My question is: Is it not better to have a far-from-perfect resolution that protects animals, than having no resolution at all?
Perhaps it is necessary to prepare a new resolution dealing with this subject, to ensure animals are somehow and somewhat protected.
After all, don't you like animals? I cannot imagine why there were so many votes for repelling the fore-mentioned resolution.

One of the ambassadors here said: "For the 500,000th time: it don't work like that. If you want to change the law, you have to repeal it first." However, there is no guarantee that the law will be changed. Is there a prepared and officially ready 'Animal resolution' to replace the one you just repealed?

I hope I am not bothering you with my humble opinion, and hope to receive no insulting remarks. In case somebody does feel , in one way or another, insulted by my humble opinion, I ask for apology and am ready to apologize.

The lands of Humilite.

Couple things:
Just because there isn't an international law protecting animals doesn't mean nations cant or wont pass national laws to cover the same area...Personally, I don't see how the welfare of pets is in any way an international issue. Nothing is stopping a nation from passing these laws on their own.
People will repeal then often draft replacements, as you can see all over the forum. Some do more, some do less, some do the same thing but in different ways. It depends on the issue at hand. Yes, there will be a gap where animals are not protected by international law, but the margin of issue would be so small, its worth it for a better law. This, however, doesn't always happen.

[Belzia]

good job, it passed.

[Frisbeeteria]

Repeal "Animal Protection Act " was passed 9,762 votes to 2,259.

[Talkistan]

Although my nation voted against the repeal, I would be stupid for not reaping its benefits! A kick a day for the dog, from now on...

[The Dourian Embassy]

Although my nation voted against the repeal, I would be stupid for not reaping its benefits! A kick a day for the dog, from now on...

You could do that even with the resolution in place, as long as you made sure it was an unowned animal.

[Talkistan]

Although my nation voted against the repeal, I would be stupid for not reaping its benefits! A kick a day for the dog, from now on...

You could do that even with the resolution in place, as long as you made sure it was an unowned animal.

Yes...but where's the fun in that?