[DEFEATED] Ban on Forced Sterilisation

[Catsfern]

As a nation that regularly practices sterilization as a method to punish sex offenders this restriction on our justice system can not be accepted.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Not under WA law, which defines genocide as :"any act committed, or measure enacted, with the intent to destroy, in whole or partially, an identifiable group of persons on the basis of belief, ethnicity, nationality, culture, or a perceived innate characteristic, which for the purposes of this resolution shall include sexual orientation."

"Strictly speaking, many genetic defects are not perceived, but actual and identifiable. They are not beliefs, ethnicities, nationalities, or cultures. Thus, a government campaign to limit genetic maladies isn't genocide, except insofar as you use it to curry emotional support.

"The C.D.S.P. is opposed. There are, frankly, compelling government interests in limiting the propagation of certain genetic maladies, and the existing protections for genocide and patient's medical rights are adequate to protect unethical use of this system."

“If you perceive a characteristic, then it is a perceived characteristic. I just perceived the fact that you exist, but that does not mean that I cannot identify this as being certainly true. The compelling interest in prohibiting genetic conditions does not outweigh the far more compelling interest in not committing genocide.”

"A more accurate use of "perceive" in that resolution is not one of conscious awareness, but as subjective interpretation. Objective analysis is not subjective. Reducing burdens on national health and welfare systems is a compelling interest when that condition is empirically proven. Ambiguity favors the accused, not the accuser."

[Kenmoria]

“If you perceive a characteristic, then it is a perceived characteristic. I just perceived the fact that you exist, but that does not mean that I cannot identify this as being certainly true. The compelling interest in prohibiting genetic conditions does not outweigh the far more compelling interest in not committing genocide.”

"A more accurate use of "perceive" in that resolution is not one of conscious awareness, but as subjective interpretation. Objective analysis is not subjective. Reducing burdens on national health and welfare systems is a compelling interest when that condition is empirically proven. Ambiguity favors the accused, not the accuser."

“It may be that what you are doing is legal, but that does not make it right. I would far rather live in a nation that has a slightly less efficient health and welfare system than live in one that practices systematic ‘technically not genocide but still uncomfortably close.’”

As a nation that regularly practices sterilization as a method to punish sex offenders this restriction on our justice system can not be accepted.

“Somebody can still commit rape when sterilised. The only point of a sterilisation punishment is permanent retribution. Even assuming that there is absolutely no chance of a mistake, this still isn’t a good model for justice.”

[Separatist Peoples]

“It may be that what you are doing is legal, but that does not make it right. I would far rather live in a nation that has a slightly less efficient health and welfare system than live in one that practices systematic ‘technically not genocide but still uncomfortably close.’”

"Ambassador, that is your decision. And, incidentally, it is a decision available to our citizens. Neither I nor my government care about moral objections, only ones based on utilitarian policy. Moral objections are little more than appeals to emotion and are summarily ignored, as all appeals to emotion should be."

[Catsfern]

"A more accurate use of "perceive" in that resolution is not one of conscious awareness, but as subjective interpretation. Objective analysis is not subjective. Reducing burdens on national health and welfare systems is a compelling interest when that condition is empirically proven. Ambiguity favors the accused, not the accuser."

“It may be that what you are doing is legal, but that does not make it right. I would far rather live in a nation that has a slightly less efficient health and welfare system than live in one that practices systematic ‘technically not genocide but still uncomfortably close.’”

As a nation that regularly practices sterilization as a method to punish sex offenders this restriction on our justice system can not be accepted.

“Somebody can still commit rape when sterilised. The only point of a sterilisation punishment is permanent retribution. Even assuming that there is absolutely no chance of a mistake, this still isn’t a good model for justice.”

while that is true that someone can still commit an offence it serves as a symbolic and permanent punishment for a criminals wrong doings, My nation prides itself on a swift and effective delivery of justice. Catsfern has no prisons so if this resolution is passed the effectiveness of the national legal system will only decrease as our methods of punishment will be harshly limited.

[United Massachusetts]

"I thought this Assembly, as it has told me many times, supports reproductive freedoms. Why is this proposal failing, then?"

[Catsfern]

"I thought this Assembly, as it has told me many times, supports reproductive freedoms. Why is this proposal failing, then?"

I feel its because it is almost too restrictive on the use of sterilization as a criminal punishment.

[United Massachusetts]

"I thought this Assembly, as it has told me many times, supports reproductive freedoms. Why is this proposal failing, then?"

I feel its because it is almost too restrictive on the use of sterilization as a criminal punishment.

So, this Assembly does not believe in reproductive rights?

[Catsfern]

I feel its because it is almost too restrictive on the use of sterilization as a criminal punishment.

So, this Assembly does not believe in reproductive rights?

I can not speak for the assembly as a whold only for myself, but what I can say for myself is that I believe equally in individual reproductive rights, and criminal punishment, and in the case of criminal punishment some rights must be restricted either temporarily or permanently including reproductive.

[United Massachusetts]

So, this Assembly does not believe in reproductive rights?

I can not speak for the assembly as a whold only for myself, but what I can say for myself is that I believe equally in individual reproductive rights, and criminal punishment, and in the case of criminal punishment some rights must be restricted either temporarily or permanently including reproductive.

So, should I presume that you support curtailing fundamental reproductive rights?

I thought this assembly told me that "reproductive rights are not negotiable." What changed?

[Catsfern]

I can not speak for the assembly as a whold only for myself, but what I can say for myself is that I believe equally in individual reproductive rights, and criminal punishment, and in the case of criminal punishment some rights must be restricted either temporarily or permanently including reproductive.

So, should I presume that you support curtailing fundamental reproductive rights?

I thought this assembly told me that "reproductive rights are not negotiable." What changed?

I can't aswer you second question as that is an issue personal to each nation. however on your first point your presumption may be half correct. In the case of a perfectly innocent average citizen i frankly could not care less what they do with their bodies, thus they have complete reproductive freedom, however in the case of a criminal say a rapist or child molester i find it necessary to make a point that if you use your body to harm others harm will come to it, Catsfern as a nation regularly practices corporal punishment, and if this resolution passes it will greatly effect my nations legal system as the most strait forward and effective way of punishment for those crimes we have implemented would be lost.

[Kenmoria]

"I thought this Assembly, as it has told me many times, supports reproductive freedoms. Why is this proposal failing, then?"

“It’s almost as though this Assembly is composed of many different nations, and is not a single homogenous mass with consistent beliefs.”

[The United Separatist Empire]

Ban on Forced Sterilisation
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Mild | Proposed by: Germany

---

The World Assembly,

Lauding the previous efforts of this assembly to protect civil rights,

Recognising that forced sterilisation can have detrimental effects on the individual, including depression and long term psychological effects,

Noting that sterilisation against an individual's will continues to be used as a method of reducing the population of minorities in some member-states and as a punishment for sexual offenders,

Acknowledging that each individual should have the right to choose to reproduce or not as long as it does not violate another individual's right to choose,

Seeking to ban this method that has been, in the past, used to get rid of people that society has considered to be unwanted members, whether they were sexual or ethnic minorities or people with specific disabilities,


Hereby,

1. Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, "sterilisation" as the permanent elimination of an individual's ability to reproduce through the removal or alteration of their reproductive organs or the physiological processes that enable reproduction, through chemical or physical means;
   
   
2. Prohibits:
   
   
   1. The sterilisation of any individual without their informed consent, unless a parent or guardian is legally able to and does consent on their behalf;
   2. The extradition of any criminal to places where they may be subject to forced sterilisation as a form of punishment;
3. Requires that member states:
   
   
   1. Carry out thorough investigations into all sterilisation services within their borders, to ensure no illegal sterilisation is taking place;
   2. Reasonably punish people who carry out illegal sterilisation;
4. Urges member states to provide reparations for victims of forced sterilisation.

You can’t stop me from castrating minorities! How else can I control my population?! If they don’t wanna be oppressed they should get their shit together and start oppressing people themselves!

[United Massachusetts]

"I thought this Assembly, as it has told me many times, supports reproductive freedoms. Why is this proposal failing, then?"

“It’s almost as though this Assembly is composed of many different nations, and is not a single homogenous mass with consistent beliefs.”

"Oh, I'm sorry. I just recalled something about hearing that reproductive rights being universally agreed upon. And, if I recall correctly, I think you said something to that end. As did several other people.

Now, my memory may be failing, but I recall the phrase of choice being "reproductive rights are non negotiable.""

[Catsfern]

“It’s almost as though this Assembly is composed of many different nations, and is not a single homogenous mass with consistent beliefs.”

"Oh, I'm sorry. I just recalled something about hearing that reproductive rights being universally agreed upon. And, if I recall correctly, I think you said something to that end. As did several other people.

Now, my memory may be failing, but I recall the phrase of choice being "reproductive rights are non negotiable.""

Im sorry to inform you, but while the popular opinion may often be in favor of reproductive rights even the resolutions that passed revived votes against them. Thus im afraid that they may not be entirely universally agreed upon.

[United Massachusetts]

"Oh, I'm sorry. I just recalled something about hearing that reproductive rights being universally agreed upon. And, if I recall correctly, I think you said something to that end. As did several other people.

Now, my memory may be failing, but I recall the phrase of choice being "reproductive rights are non negotiable.""

Im sorry to inform you, but while the popular opinion may often be in favor of reproductive rights even the resolutions that passed revived votes against them. Thus im afraid that they may not be entirely universally agreed upon.

Oh I agree. But some regulars do not.

[Ave Gloriana]

This proposal would make it illegal to castrate rapists and child molesters.

This is not a worthy and pressing issue to be decided at an international level. If you don't like sterilising criminals, don't do it.

But stop trying to tell the rest of us how to deal with criminal scum.

[Kenmoria]

“It’s almost as though this Assembly is composed of many different nations, and is not a single homogenous mass with consistent beliefs.”

"Oh, I'm sorry. I just recalled something about hearing that reproductive rights being universally agreed upon. And, if I recall correctly, I think you said something to that end. As did several other people.

Now, my memory may be failing, but I recall the phrase of choice being "reproductive rights are non negotiable.""

“I would love for reproductive rights to being universally agreed upon within the WA. Luckily, this has already partially happened with the apssing fo strong legislation. It does seem, however, that the member states draw the line at banning sterilisation of people. Why this has happened is a mystery to me, though I don’t rule out the possibility that people are voting against because this doesn’t ban child sterilisation. If this is correct, then it would be because of a belief in reproductive freedoms that this is failing.”

Ban on Forced Sterilisation
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Mild | Proposed by: Germany

---

The World Assembly,

Lauding the previous efforts of this assembly to protect civil rights,

Recognising that forced sterilisation can have detrimental effects on the individual, including depression and long term psychological effects,

Noting that sterilisation against an individual's will continues to be used as a method of reducing the population of minorities in some member-states and as a punishment for sexual offenders,

Acknowledging that each individual should have the right to choose to reproduce or not as long as it does not violate another individual's right to choose,

Seeking to ban this method that has been, in the past, used to get rid of people that society has considered to be unwanted members, whether they were sexual or ethnic minorities or people with specific disabilities,


Hereby,

1. Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, "sterilisation" as the permanent elimination of an individual's ability to reproduce through the removal or alteration of their reproductive organs or the physiological processes that enable reproduction, through chemical or physical means;
   
   
2. Prohibits:
   
   
   1. The sterilisation of any individual without their informed consent, unless a parent or guardian is legally able to and does consent on their behalf;
   2. The extradition of any criminal to places where they may be subject to forced sterilisation as a form of punishment;
3. Requires that member states:
   
   
   1. Carry out thorough investigations into all sterilisation services within their borders, to ensure no illegal sterilisation is taking place;
   2. Reasonably punish people who carry out illegal sterilisation;
4. Urges member states to provide reparations for victims of forced sterilisation.

You can’t stop me from castrating minorities! How else can I control my population?! If they don’t wanna be oppressed they should get their shit together and start oppressing people themselves!

(OOC: Castrating solely minorities would probably fall afoul of GA #035, Charter of Civil Rights.)

[Dirty Americans]

So, this Assembly does not believe in reproductive rights?

You actually thought it was about "reproductive rights?" You have no right to reproduce; only a right not to reproduce and the WA will be more than happy to let member states the ability to enforce that right on its people if and when that state chooses to.

[Dirty Americans]

This proposal would make it illegal to castrate rapists and child molesters.

Actually they key word is "permanent elimination"

Chemical castration is castration via anaphrodisiac drugs, whether to reduce libido and sexual activity, to treat cancer, or otherwise. Unlike surgical castration, where the gonads are removed through an incision in the body, chemical castration does not remove organs, nor is it a form of sterilization. Chemical castration is generally considered reversible when treatment is discontinued, although permanent effects in body chemistry can sometimes be seen, as in the case of bone density loss increasing with length of use of DMPA.

In May 2016, The New York Times reported that a number of countries use chemical castration on sex offenders, often in return for reduced sentences.

[Catsfern]

This proposal would make it illegal to castrate rapists and child molesters.

Actually they key word is "permanent elimination"

Chemical castration is castration via anaphrodisiac drugs, whether to reduce libido and sexual activity, to treat cancer, or otherwise. Unlike surgical castration, where the gonads are removed through an incision in the body, chemical castration does not remove organs, nor is it a form of sterilization. Chemical castration is generally considered reversible when treatment is discontinued, although permanent effects in body chemistry can sometimes be seen, as in the case of bone density loss increasing with length of use of DMPA.

In May 2016, The New York Times reported that a number of countries use chemical castration on sex offenders, often in return for reduced sentences.

thanks for the handy loophole if this is passed.

[Zheif]

The Federal Republic of Zheif firmly opposes this resolution for the following reasons:

1. As many other member nations have already pointed out, section 2.a) forces WA member nations to allow parents and legal guardians to sterilize their child or dependent.

2. The following acknowledgement:

Acknowledging that each individual should have the right to choose to reproduce or not as long as it does not violate another individual's right to choose

would prevent member nations from implementing non-invasive, harmless population control measures such as a single child policy or a double child policy. Although Zheif itself is not troubled with overpopulation, we acknowledge that it is a real problem that other nations may face.

3. Not all nations have the resources or extensive police bureaucracy necessary for a "thorough investigation" into "all sterilization services within their borders", as is mandated by section 3.a). If this resolution were to pass, the Federal Republic of Zheif would be forced to rapidly and massively expand its police force in a way which is contradictory to our core values as a nation.

4. The reasonable punishment mandated by section 3.b) is far too vague to have any actual impact in combatting forced sterilization. Because the standards for reasonable punishment are not outlined by the resolution, nations will easily continue their practices of forced sterilization by punishing perpetrators with only a small fine. This, combined with section 2.a), would have the unwanted effect of increasing forced sterilization in nations where it has already been banned while only negligibly affecting the rates of forced sterilization in nations where it is common practice.

5. The Federal Republic of Zheif cannot, in good conscience, vote in favor of a resolution drafted by a nation which espouses the greatness of "reproductive rights" while at the same time implementing policies antithetical to the very concept of reproductive rights, such as "Permanent Marriage", "No Adultery", and "No Abortion", within their own borders.

Although the Federal Republic of Zheif acknowledges that forced sterilization is an invasive and immoral practice, we cannot help but conclude that this resolution would do nothing to end forced sterilization, and would instead promote its spread.

[Marxist Germany]

The Federal Republic of Zheif firmly opposes this resolution for the following reasons:

1. As many other member nations have already pointed out, section 2.a) forces WA member nations to allow parents and legal guardians to sterilize their child or dependent.

"Ambassador, section 2a is an exception to a mandate, it does not force nations to allow parents to sterilise their children. Patients Rights Act does."

2. The following acknowledgement:

Acknowledging that each individual should have the right to choose to reproduce or not as long as it does not violate another individual's right to choose

would prevent member nations from implementing non-invasive, harmless population control measures such as a single child policy or a double child policy. Although Zheif itself is not troubled with overpopulation, we acknowledge that it is a real problem that other nations may face.

"That's a preambulatory clause, it is non-operative and does not carry mandates to member states."

3. Not all nations have the resources or extensive police bureaucracy necessary for a "thorough investigation" into "all sterilization services within their borders", as is mandated by section 3.a). If this resolution were to pass, the Federal Republic of Zheif would be forced to rapidly and massively expand its police force in a way which is contradictory to our core values as a nation.

"This mandate was added to prevent nations from ignoring forced sterilisation being carried out 'without their information'."

4. The reasonable punishment mandated by section 3.b) is far too vague to have any actual impact in combatting forced sterilization. Because the standards for reasonable punishment are not outlined by the resolution, nations will easily continue their practices of forced sterilization by punishing perpetrators with only a small fine. This, combined with section 2.a), would have the unwanted effect of increasing forced sterilization in nations where it has already been banned while only negligibly affecting the rates of forced sterilization in nations where it is common practice.

"Small fines is certainly not a good faith interpretation of reasonable, and there isn't much that could be done about it. Giving examples wouldn't change the meaning."

5. The Federal Republic of Zheif cannot, in good conscience, vote in favor of a resolution drafted by a nation which espouses the greatness of "reproductive rights" while at the same time implementing policies antithetical to the very concept of reproductive rights, such as "Permanent Marriage", "No Adultery", and "No Abortion", within their own borders.

Although the Federal Republic of Zheif acknowledges that forced sterilization is an invasive and immoral practice, we cannot help but conclude that this resolution would do nothing to end forced sterilization, and would instead promote its spread.

OOC:Policies are non-canon, I have wanted to remove the former two policies for a very long time yet I haven't received the relevant issues.

[Alterrum]

Given the cultural diversity and unique ethnic circumstances present in the world, we consider this unnuanced WA micromanagement and overreach, and thus oppose.

https://humanbiologicaldiversity.com/

[Bananaistan]

"This is undoubtedly an anti-choice piece of writing dressed up as protecting rights when it actually seriously impacts upon the rights of children and teenagers and would permit less scrupulous member nations to allow parents do irreparable harm to their children. I am unsurprised that a delegation from the "won't someone think of the children" brigade which openly and actively flaunts their disregard for international law once again has proposed legislation which could be seriously harmful to children. But then we know that they don't care for children once they're born.

"In summary we commit to continue opposing proposed legislation from nations who do not carry out their obligations under international law in good faith. And even if this were not the case here, this resolution is seriously flawed regarding children's rights."

- Ted