Medwedgrad wrote:Ardiveds wrote:OOC: I'd also like to point out that the NS multiverse has sapient creatures other than humans. There are nations whose citizens are non humans which is a reason defining 'animals' in relation to humans doesn't work in a WA resolution.
Medwedgrad doesn't acknowledge the existence of sapient non-humans, but even if we would acknowledge it, it would not change the main argument for my disagreement with this resolution.
OOC: That's fine. Its your vote, what you do with it is no one's business, and truth be told, the definition could have been easily rectified by simply adding a 'of a non sapient species' after the 'non sapient being'. But just know that this definition can not become a basis for any future redefinition of 'human' due to the way definitions work in WA proposals and even if someone did try to experiment on human fetuses or people in coma, they are gonna have pretty big non-compliance related trouble.