[PASSED] Disabled Voters Act

[Christian Democrats]

Are people with this condition not people in your view?

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and autism are both general terms for a group of complex disorders of brain development. These disorders are characterized, in varying degrees, by difficulties in social interaction, verbal and nonverbal communication and repetitive behaviors.

http://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism

You literally quoted an autistic person using identity-first language and replied with person-first language, then linked to autism speaks.

1. Really? "Autistic person" and "person with autism" are equivalent terms. Do you need an English lesson?

• Red-haired person = person with red hair
• Muscular person = person with muscles
• Depressed person = person with depression
• White person = person with white skin
• Blind person = person with blindness

Since when is it offensive to call an "autistic person" a "person who is autistic" or a "person with autism"?

2. The link was for you in a response to your post.

3. I'll repeat that some autistic people are intellectually disabled, some have average intelligence, and some are very intelligent.

Example: Autistic boy with an IQ of 168 (the top 0.1%)

This proposal does not define intelligence, and it has no effect whatsoever on intelligence restrictions that nations might have. (As I indicated OOC earlier, most real-world jurisdictions have intelligence restrictions of one kind or another on voting rights.)

[The Dark Star Republic]

Since when is it offensive to call an "autistic person" a "person who is autistic" or a "person with autism"?

Seems like some prefer "identity-first", some "person-first" - and I think Linux's point was that the poster you were responding to used the former.

Not that any of this really has any bearing on the resolution...

[Christian Democrats]

Seems like some prefer "identity-first", some "person-first" - and I think Linux's point was that the poster you were responding to used the former.

Words would have been more straightforward than an animated gif. Also, Icesun's preference is unclear.

As a disability rights advocate and an autistic self-advocate I feel strongly that actually consulting a disabled person may have helped in the writing of this proposal. I definitely don't like the disenfranchisement of disabled people but "general intelligence" doesn't stop people from being able to make a reasoned decision and that covers a LARGE loophole of people who are disabled but will have been able to make (and have in past made) good voting decisions. It leaves a loophole that would have allowed for Jim Crow type laws which it's directly attempting to prevent the way it's represented.

The term "autistic self-advocate" is ambiguous. It can mean "self-advocate for autistic people" or "self-advocate for people with autism." Without any other guide, the term "autistic self-advocate" does not indicate a preference one way or the other.

Icesun uses identity-first labels twice in his OOC comments.

Icesun uses a person-first label once in his OOC comments.

I'd like to know if he has a preference given that he used identity-first language and person-first language as a "disability rights advocate."

I'll admit that I'm not familiar with the autism label debate. (I know a little about the disabled vs. handicapped debate.)

[Centaurius]

I am in full support of allowing people of physical disabilities to vote, but I think there should be some kind of test used to make sure that people with a medical history of mental disabilities are of significant intelligence to vote.

[Defwa]

OOC can we not make this a tumblr post of semantic political correctness?

[Arstotzkas]

This proposal seems quite reasonable and good.

However, please define what you consider to be "disabled"

[Defwa]

This proposal seems quite reasonable and good.

However, please define what you consider to be "disabled"

Section one, dear.

[Christian Democrats]

I am in full support of allowing people of physical disabilities to vote, but I think there should be some kind of test used to make sure that people with a medical history of mental disabilities are of significant intelligence to vote.

Why "significant intelligence"? This proposal does not cover disabilities that "diminish general intelligence." Your nation, subject to the mandates of other resolutions, is free to deal with low-intelligence persons and intellectually disabled persons however it wishes.

This proposal seems quite reasonable and good.

However, please define what you consider to be "disabled"

"[N]o person who is otherwise qualified to vote shall be denied the right to vote in a public election on account of blindness, deafness, developmental reading disorder, developmental coordination disorder, limited mobility, or any other physical or mental impairment that does not diminish general intelligence."

For "impaired," the dictionary says "weakened," "damaged," "harmed," "diminished," "reduced," "lessened," "decreased," "impeded," and "hindered." In other words, it covers any condition that negatively affects one physically or mentally.

[VanV712]

The only thing I have against this proposal is the language of "mentally disabled." Folks with mental handicaps are too easily swayed.

[Christian Democrats]

The only thing I have against this proposal is the language of "mentally disabled." Folks with mental handicaps are too easily swayed.

Excuse me. Where does this proposal use the phrase "mentally disabled"?

Even if it did use that phrase, that alone would not be a good reason for voting against.

(It appears that many nations here are noncompliant with the Read the Resolution Act.)

[Defwa]

The only thing I have against this proposal is the language of "mentally disabled." Folks with mental handicaps are too easily swayed.

You should consider actually reading for comprehension.
Mental disabilities that impact intelligence are still valid reasons to withhold voting rights

[Separatist Peoples]

The only thing I have against this proposal is the language of "mentally disabled." Folks with mental handicaps are too easily swayed.

You should consider actually reading for comprehension.
Mental disabilities that impact intelligence are still valid reasons to withhold voting rights

"...and nobody sees this as a huge potential for abuse? Yet another reason that the WA should butt out of democratic systems until it can compel all nations to be democratic."
OOC: which, I guess, means never?

[Christian Democrats]

Yet another reason that the WA should butt out of democratic systems until it can compel all nations to be democratic.

How sensible: unless I can get all I want, I want nothing . . .

[Linux and the X]

1. Really? "Autistic person" and "person with autism" are equivalent terms. Do you need an English lesson?

No, but apparently you do. Specifically, I would suggest reviewing the difference between denotation and connotation.

2. The link was for you in a response to your post.

You could've linked to a site that doesn't suck. Or, better, not splained.

[Defwa]

You should consider actually reading for comprehension.
Mental disabilities that impact intelligence are still valid reasons to withhold voting rights

"...and nobody sees this as a huge potential for abuse?"

If they're abusing it, they're already doing it. At least this can serve to reduce the impact

[The Empire of Ebola]

How is this vote even LEGAL when not every Nation is a Democracy or has a vote?

It seems to me that the advocates for the disabled have paid off certain WA members in an attempt to shove their agenda on nations.

[Christian Democrats]

How is this vote even LEGAL when not every Nation is a Democracy or has a vote?

It seems to me that the advocates for the disabled have paid off certain WA members in an attempt to shove their agenda on nations.

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=159348

[Linux and the X]

"...and nobody sees this as a huge potential for abuse?"

If they're abusing it, they're already doing it. At least this can serve to reduce the impact

Given the Secretariat's prohibition on duplicative legislation, I would prefer to wait for a better-written proposal.

[Christian Democrats]

If they're abusing it, they're already doing it. At least this can serve to reduce the impact

Given the Secretariat's prohibition on duplicative legislation, I would prefer to wait for a better-written proposal.

What's wrong with this proposal in your opinion?

[The Empire of Ebola]

This supposed Draft being voted on is against the Charter of the WA and is, as such, illegal. Why is it even being voted on? This is just more evidence that the WA is being bribed by certain advocacy groups and pro=democracy nations to force their ideology onto others.

[Christian Democrats]

This supposed Draft being voted on is against the Charter of the WA and is, as such, illegal.

What charter?

[Linux and the X]

Given the Secretariat's prohibition on duplicative legislation, I would prefer to wait for a better-written proposal.

What's wrong with this proposal in your opinion?

I and others have already brought up concerns with this proposal. You have dismissed those concerns. You have a right to do so, of course, but it means I'm voting against.

[Separatist Peoples]

This supposed Draft being voted on is against the Charter of the WA and is, as such, illegal.

What charter?

"Don't bother engaging the Elbow Empire's delegation. They have a tenuous grasp on Law, and no grasp on Reality, and feeding them attention just fuels that derangement. Last week they claimed to execute all citizens of the Confederate Dominion in their territory for business, keenly missing that there were literally none there to begin with. Who they executed is beyond me..."

[Icesun]

-SNIP-

As Mundiferrum says, this proposal will not prevent nations from extending voting rights to the intellectually disabled on their own. If you want international voting rights for such individuals, you could try writing your own resolution.

Furthermore, individuals with intellectual disabilities are often unable to manage their own affairs, so I certainly do not believe they have a strong claim to a prospective international right to have a say in the affairs of others.

Discrimination in voting rights based on IQ is not manifestly unjust. It seems to be a national or subnational issue.

-SNIP-

I don't think it's Jim Crowish at all for a nation to prevent someone with diminished intelligence from voting. A government reasonably might exclude from voting individuals whose intellectual capacities are similar to those of minors.

-SNIP-

A person doesn't get the right to vote because he's a human being. If that were so, children would have voting rights too.

-SNIP-

This act will not disenfranchise anyone. Nothing in it prevents member states from allowing low-IQ persons to vote.

(Image)

Are people with this condition not people in your view?

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and autism are both general terms for a group of complex disorders of brain development. These disorders are characterized, in varying degrees, by difficulties in social interaction, verbal and nonverbal communication and repetitive behaviors.

http://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Autistics+against+Autism+Speaks

The reason Linux and the X did the Jen Gif (nice response btw) was because you were being ableist. Spend FIVE SECONDS actually looking at the links on that google page and educate your privileged self as to why autism speaks is abominable before you decide you have any position to speak on this topic especially if you link them.

On TOP of which - IT IS Jim Crow-ish - in that it defines very clearly who should be considered disabled on an international level worthy of protection from an international standpoint. Sure - within NatSov of our own nations we could protect against discriminatory rules that would disenfranchise a lot of people that are disabled intellectually... we could protect disabled voters rights NOW without this proposal. But the fact is - you're trying to make this a INTERNATIONAL thing - which means that it should either have NO loopholes or not exist at all. Claiming that we should nationally make up for poor drafting of an international proposal is the biggest pile of "pass the buck" when someone happens to point out that you've written something with giant discriminatory gaps.

Also general intelligence has absolutely NOTHING to do with decision making ability (two separate things, one CAN inform the other, doesn't necessarily mean that it's a necessary component). Despite that - it requires careful testing- how would you test a person's intelligence and decision making ability? Because they DID that with the Jim Crow laws by making illiterate or only semi-literate poor black people try to read really hard words deliberately and then denied them the vote. A country could EASILY take advantage of the "general intelligence" loop hole and do the same thing. This doesn't protect against discrimination -it OUT RIGHT PROTECTS AND PROMOTES IT.

Either it SHOULDN'T be an international consideration - or it should be written properly so that it doesn't leave this giant loophole (which is more like a loop-planet-sized-gaping-wound).

One or the other. Trying to have it both like you are is pretty half-assed.

OOC: FYI - I prefer identity-first language and I'M A GIRL

[Mandokarla]

Also general intelligence has absolutely NOTHING to do with decision making ability (two separate things, one CAN inform the other, doesn't necessarily mean that it's a necessary component). Despite that - it requires careful testing- how would you test a person's intelligence and decision making ability? Because they DID that with the Jim Crow laws by making illiterate or only semi-literate poor black people try to read really hard words deliberately and then denied them the vote. A country could EASILY take advantage of the "general intelligence" loop hole and do the same thing. This doesn't protect against discrimination -it OUT RIGHT PROTECTS AND PROMOTES IT.

Either it SHOULDN'T be an international consideration - or it should be written properly so that it doesn't leave this giant loophole (which is more like a loop-planet-sized-gaping-wound).

It looks like someone messed up big time when drafting this. The proposal is really pointless with that giant loop hole (gaping wound).