Personal.
Advertisement
by Marxist Germany » Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:32 am
by Marxist Germany » Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:32 am
by Marxist Germany » Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:32 am
by Marxist Germany » Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:33 am
by Marxist Germany » Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:34 am
by Marxist Germany » Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:38 am
by Caracasus » Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:59 am
by Lord Dominator » Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:24 am
Codd wrote:Funny Lord Dominator, you label anything you don't like as "far right". I guess we're both guilty.
by New Bremerton » Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:28 am
Tinfect wrote:
OOC:
First of all, go actually learn what Affirmative Action is, and why it's necessary. Second, I've not seen any reason this would possibly ban it.
For the record, the requirement of psychological evaluation, can, and has, been used to pigeonhole trans people into specific interpretations of the gender binary, and to outright exclude people who don't fit neatly into predetermined sexist boxes from accessing the assistance and resources they need. The illusory threat of cis people abusing the law to do bad things is simple nonsense; if they would do that, they were going to do the bad thing anyway, and the law changes nothing, and serves merely to harm trans people.
by White Bluff » Sat Feb 09, 2019 2:15 am
by Arasi Luvasa » Sat Feb 09, 2019 2:49 am
New Bremerton wrote:Maowi wrote:Protecting the Civil Rights of Sexual and Gender Minorities
Category: Civil Rights
Strength: Significant
HOLDING that the sexuality or gender of an individual does not make them inferior or superior to another individual of a differing sexuality or gender,
REASONING that individuals of all sexualities and genders should be granted the same civil and political rights, and
NOTING the lack of General Assembly legislation which specifically clarifies the civil and political rights of sexual and gender minorities,
The World Assembly:
A) DEFINES, for the purposes of this resolution, "civil marriage" as a legally recognised union of two or more people as partners in a personal relationship, solemnised as a civil contract with or without religious ceremony.
B) FURTHER DEFINES, for the purposes of this resolution, "marriage rights" as privileges granted to an individual solely or in part as a consequence of their civil marriage.
Hereby,
- REQUIRES all member nations which allow civil marriages between individuals of a certain sexuality or gender to allow civil marriages between individuals of all sexualities and genders, subject to previously passed extant World Assembly resolutions.
- ORDERS all member nations to provide the same civil marriage services for individuals of all sexualities and genders.
- COMPELS all member nations to grant the same marriage rights to civilly married individuals of all sexualities and genders.
- REQUIRES all member nations to apply legislation of the same scope and effect for the termination of civil marriages between individuals of all sexualities and genders.
- MANDATES that every member nation must grant exactly the same rights, powers, permissions and services to individuals of all sexualities and genders, subject to exactly the same qualifying conditions. Such conditions may not include the sexuality or gender of the individual(s) concerned.
- ORDERS all member nations to impose exactly the same sanctions or punishments on all organisations which deny any right, power, permission or service to an individual based on their sexuality or gender, as the sanctions or punishments imposed on organisations discriminating on the basis of other arbitrary, reductive criteria (such as, but not limited to, ethnicity, age and religion).
- MANDATES that all member nations must allow each of their citizens to choose or change their own gender, and that member nations must officially recognise and accept the individual's chosen gender.
- CLARIFIES that religious organizations and their internal discrimination do not fall under this resolution, and should be addressed by future legislation.
While clause 5 continues to provide religious organizations with a loophole and continued carte-blanche to discriminate against sexual and gender minorities, it also leaves the door open for such a loophole to be eliminated in subsequent resolutions. Private establishments that open their doors to the public should not be allowed to discriminate against their customers simply for who they are.
Clause 4 is also sufficiently flexible enough to allow member states to require that transgender individuals undergo psychological evaluation before being allowed to legally transition to a gender other than the one assigned at birth. In New Bremerton, sex reassignment surgery is not required, there is no age limit to legally transition, and any psychological evaluation is kept strictly confidential so as to enable trans individuals to avoid any kind of public embarrassment while at the same time preventing transgender fraud, whereby a cisgendered individual is able to fake being trans in order to break the law, thereby undermining the rights and dignity of the trans community at large. This is similar to preventing benefit fraud by those who don't qualify for certain handouts, thereby undermining the rights and dignity of poor and working-class people.
Also, if this proposal bans affirmative action, then it would only serve to reinforce our support even further. Affirmative action is just politically correct code for plain old discrimination.
We hereby lodge our vote FOR this proposal.
OOC: I'm still trying to wrap my head around this whole transgender thing, but generally speaking, I consider myself to be pro-trans.
by Lamoni » Sat Feb 09, 2019 3:46 am
Licana on the M-21A2 MBT: "Well, it is one of the most badass tanks on NS."
Vortiaganica: Lamoni I understand fully, of course. The two (Lamoni & Lyras) are more inseparable than the Clinton family and politics.
Triplebaconation: Lamoni commands a quiet respect that carries its own authority. He is the Mandela of NS.
by Aestorn » Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:39 am
by Caracasus » Sat Feb 09, 2019 5:14 am
Aestorn wrote:Yes, gays are oppressed, but forcing one strain of belief onto whole WA is not only irresponsible, but also quite anti freedom, not to mention the political bias in this. Also, this goes, in my opinion, too far, especially number 4. These things are to be left to be decided on national (or regional) level, not WA.
by Kenmoria » Sat Feb 09, 2019 5:29 am
Aestorn wrote:Yes, gays are oppressed, but forcing one strain of belief onto whole WA is not only irresponsible, but also quite anti freedom, not to mention the political bias in this. Also, this goes, in my opinion, too far, especially number 4. These things are to be left to be decided on national (or regional) level, not WA.
by Araraukar » Sat Feb 09, 2019 6:37 am
Vrama wrote:With gender being undefined, a person could literally claim their gender is whatever they say it is.
Marxist Germany wrote:Are you an SJW ? You can't force my government to accept someone's "chosen gender", that's determined by genetics. Period.
Brittany Normandy Aquitaine wrote:Define gender minority, considering there is only male and female, which one would be in this case the minority, or is this towards nations who have either male or female above the other in rights.
Cela wrote:Sex is determined by genetics. Gender is a social construct.
Boonland wrote:I am confused by this. Does 'changing gender' include sex reassignment surgery?
Does this mean that a ten year old child can decide to undergo sex reassignment surgery? And if so, would they need their parents permission, or could they just tell their doctor they want it done. If the parents refuse to allow it, could the child be taken away from them?
If it does not include sex reassignment surgery, then I am even more confused about what it means to 'change gender'.
Please forgive me if my questions make me seem like an idiot. Sometimes I am an idiot, but I am really trying to understand.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Tinfect » Sat Feb 09, 2019 10:04 am
New Bremerton wrote:OOC: I was thinking about this video. In it, right-wing Canadian activist Lauren Southern (she calls herself an independent journalist, but I consider her to be a conservative political activist) successfully changes her legal gender to male, even though she's clearly faking it to make a political point against any recognition of transgender rights as being about anything more than "muh feelingz", a sentiment I strongly disagree with. She shows that this kind of fakery is theoretically possible in Canada at least. Even if it doesn't happen on a regular, criminal basis, it's still sufficient cause for concern. Where do we draw the line? I honestly don't have the answer to that question.
New Bremerton wrote:Again, I'm not trying to belittle trans people in any way. Trans recognition is something I think needs to be phased in gradually, so I'm with the Left on this issue.
New Bremerton wrote:Also, affirmative action in whose country? Yours or mine? Because AA has been tried and tested in my country for decades on the grounds that the ethnic majority Malay-Muslims are economically less well off than the Chinese minority to which I belong, and also in an attempt to appease the disgruntled Malays who were involved in deadly racial riots (read: anti-Chinese pogroms) that took place in 1969. Cronyism, corruption, racist entitlement, sloth, massive public debt and a bloated civil service consisting almost entirely of Malays has been the end result. Rather than attempt to emulate our relative success, the majority seeks to put us down for daring to be more successful than them, and the racism coming from politicians is oftentimes explicit, with threats of violence and legal action against any non-Malay and non-Muslim daring to challenge the racist doctrine of Malay/Muslim supremacy. It's clearly reminiscent of antisemitism in early 20th century Europe, when Jews supposedly fared better than ethnic Germans and Slavs. It didn't end well for them in the end.
So yes, affirmative action is PC code for discrimination. It is highly vindictive against those whose only crime is to belong to a certain race/gender/religion etc, and it should absolutely be banned worldwide, including the ones that unfairly disadvantage straight, cisgendered men and white people (including Jews, apparently), and Asian-Americans even more so, in Western countries. Individual merit must always take precedence.
Imperium Central News Network: EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL CITIZENS ARE TO PROCEED TO EVACUATION SITES IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL FURTHER SUBSPACE SIGNALS AND SYSTEMS ARE TO BE DISABLED IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: THE FOLLOWING SYSTEMS ARE ACCESS PROHIBITED BY STANDARD/BLACKOUT [Error: Format Unrecognized] | Indomitable Bastard #283
by Arasi Luvasa » Sat Feb 09, 2019 10:41 am
by Acadian Populace » Sat Feb 09, 2019 2:12 pm
by Falcania » Sat Feb 09, 2019 3:19 pm
by Maowi » Sat Feb 09, 2019 3:24 pm
Acadian Populace wrote:Based upon the ruling of major religions, marriage is defined as the union of a man and a woman.
Based upon that, as well as our commitment to religious liberty, the Federal Republic of Acadian Populace disregards the efforts of any nation (or the assembly as a whole) to circumvent the definition of the religious rite of marriage.
- President of the Acadian Populace
by Macsenoedd » Sat Feb 09, 2019 3:36 pm
by Araraukar » Sat Feb 09, 2019 3:42 pm
Macsenoedd wrote:If I Just Make It Illegal To Not Follow The State Religion, There Will Be No Religious Discrimination!
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Scherzinger » Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:55 pm
by Maowi » Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:59 pm
Scherzinger wrote:yeah....no
same sex marriage is still banned, transgenders are executed, and i have no intention of worrying about this farce a bit
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement