NATION

PASSWORD

[DEFEATED] Restrictions on Blood Sports

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6233
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sun May 31, 2020 8:19 am

Adriatican wrote:
Kenmoria wrote:“This is not the case. Because the proposal does not allow or permit bloodsports to any extent in member nations, there would be no issue if a member state were to completely ban bloodsports in their entirety, or impose any restrictions up to this point. The lack of any clause in the text that would prohibit such restrictions implicitly allows them.”


"We thank the Honorable Delegate for their clarification. Additionally, we would express concern behind the seemingly narrow definition of "sentient" beings covered underneath the protections of this Resolution.

Adriatican is a nation of supremely advanced technology, and legally recognizes the personhood of artificial intelligences.

Though we may effectively amend this legislation to assure its protections apply to such intelligences within our jurisdictions, we would like to respectfully express our concerns that the Resolution cannot, in our opinion, be reasonably interpreted to provide its protections to Adriaris classified as A.I's, should they leave a jurisdiction where our broadening of the Resolution is not legally enforceable.

As such, we query how this may be remedied, if at all, through either additional W.A legislation, or some other means."

“I believe it is GA #354, AI Coexistence Protocol, that would help in this scenario. This resolution prohibits discrimination on the basis of a person being an artificial intelligence.”
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Ardiveds
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 191
Founded: Feb 28, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ardiveds » Sun May 31, 2020 9:25 am

"While we have decided to support this resolution, it seems it is destined to fail. Apart from the savages who enjoy the torture of animals, the ones standing against it seem to be proponents of concensual death duels and those who think this doesn't go far enough."
--- Kaiser

User avatar
Aslicuria
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Oct 22, 2019
Father Knows Best State

Postby Aslicuria » Sun May 31, 2020 9:44 am

"On Behalf of the Emperor, we must declare our objection to this proposal, simply as it prohibits our time-honored tradition of Hunting."

User avatar
Ardiveds
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 191
Founded: Feb 28, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ardiveds » Sun May 31, 2020 9:51 am

Aslicuria wrote:"On Behalf of the Emperor, we must declare our objection to this proposal, simply as it prohibits our time-honored tradition of Hunting."

"Ambassador, I urge you to read the definition of 'blood sports' carefully."
Last edited by Ardiveds on Sun May 31, 2020 9:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Spartazka
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Jan 21, 2020
Father Knows Best State

Postby Spartazka » Sun May 31, 2020 11:56 am

Spartazka opposes this legislation. We enjoy our cultural traditions of gladiatorial fights which this legislation would prohibit, even among consenting humans. While not all fights are between consenting humans, punishment in our justice system relies on gladiatorial battles and this prevents us from wasting resources on prisons. With this law enacted all prisoners would have to be executed without their chances for redemption, and the profits from the sport would be lost.

User avatar
Heavens Reach
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 127
Founded: May 08, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Heavens Reach » Sun May 31, 2020 2:23 pm

With this law enacted all prisoners would have to be executed without their chances for redemption, and the profits from the sport would be lost.


Ambassador, I believe we call this a false dilemma.

User avatar
Sudpreusland
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: May 24, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Sudpreusland » Sun May 31, 2020 6:54 pm

The Republic of Sudpreußland is voting against this proposition.

We understand the proposing nation's problems with blood sports, and we completely stand against blood sports between non consenting animals, but our upper class enjoys watching gladitorial fights between criminals, and poor people.

Still, we believe that it should be up to each individual nation to enact laws opposing blood sports, as they see fit. We believe that it is no place of the WA to tell nations what to do within their own borders. We urge all fellow nations to join us, and vote against this proposition.

-His Imperial Majesty, Emperor Wilhelm Augustus III
-His Excellency, Chancellor Victor Emmanuel Scopolori
Last edited by Sudpreusland on Sun May 31, 2020 7:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Viriles
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Dec 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Viriles » Sun May 31, 2020 8:03 pm

Unless amended to allow consented fights, this resolution is set to fail.

User avatar
Astrobolt
Attaché
 
Posts: 75
Founded: Jul 30, 2019
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Astrobolt » Sun May 31, 2020 8:34 pm

Sudpreusland wrote:We believe that it is no place of the WA to tell nations what to do within their own borders.


"The entire point of the WA is to regulate the actions of member states. If you don't like being forced by the WA to do something, you have the option of leaving the WA."
Chief of WA Mission: Reede Tappe
W.I.P

User avatar
Bigoted Libertarians
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 11
Founded: Jan 10, 2012
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Bigoted Libertarians » Sun May 31, 2020 9:40 pm

Opposed.

Seriously, what is it with you dirty foreigners in banning everything fun in the Corporation? First it’s virgin sacrifice, now blood sports. What’s next? A prohibition on alcohol to our children? They work hard in the steel mills and on the battlefield. They deserve a beer or 10!

Now get off my lawn...

User avatar
Heavens Reach
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 127
Founded: May 08, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Heavens Reach » Sun May 31, 2020 9:53 pm

Bigoted Libertarians wrote:Opposed.

Seriously, what is it with you dirty foreigners in banning everything fun in the Corporation? First it’s virgin sacrifice, now blood sports. What’s next? A prohibition on alcohol to our children? They work hard in the steel mills and on the battlefield. They deserve a beer or 10!

Now get off my lawn...


Ambassador, I do believe you have just suggested that your nation stands in violation of General Assembly resolution #4, Restrictions on Child Labor -- specifically, clause C, and nearly all of clause B -- as well as General Assembly resolution #222, Prevention of Child Abuse -- particularly the mandate that all acts of child abuse, specifically as it is defined in subsection iii, be criminalized.

User avatar
Heavens Reach
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 127
Founded: May 08, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Heavens Reach » Sun May 31, 2020 9:59 pm

Viriles wrote:Unless amended to allow consented fights, this resolution is set to fail.


It doesn't disallow consented fights; just fights that are to the death.

User avatar
Golexald
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Nov 29, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Golexald » Sun May 31, 2020 11:19 pm

The nation of Golexald will be voting against this proposal. It finds it interesting how the proposal defines blood sports as "a form of entertainment involving two or more living beings in which the aim is to injure or kill the opponent, not including hunting of non-sapient creatures", yet it only bans blood sports "in which the aim is to kill the opponent." We are unsure why they would not also ban blood sports that hurt opponents. This proposal does not do enough to protect living beings who are not being targeted for death but rather for serious injury. With that said, we will be voting against.

User avatar
Honeydewistania
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1256
Founded: Jun 09, 2017
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Honeydewistania » Sun May 31, 2020 11:20 pm

Golexald wrote:The nation of Golexald will be voting against this proposal. It finds it interesting how the proposal defines blood sports as "a form of entertainment involving two or more living beings in which the aim is to injure or kill the opponent, not including hunting of non-sapient creatures", yet it only bans blood sports "in which the aim is to kill the opponent." We are unsure why they would not also ban blood sports that hurt opponents. This proposal does not do enough to protect living beings who are not being targeted for death but rather for serious injury. With that said, we will be voting against.

It bans one with intent of death for those that consent. If you don’t consent, no sports allowed.
Honeydewistania

Regional Military Director of Lazarus
Posts OOC unless marked otherwise.
Ambassador to the WA: Benji Hepperle

The MT Army Warrior
Biggest acheivement: Spelling
GA#494 "Regulating Desalination"
GA#498 "Ban on Forced Blood Sports"
GA#502 Repeal "Freedom to Seek Medical Care II"

SC#315 "Commend Vippertooth33"

User avatar
Ctulhu
Secretary
 
Posts: 30
Founded: Jun 02, 2018
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Ctulhu » Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:08 am

Ctulhu will be voting against this proposal, we appreciate the intention behind the resolution but the execution lacks. This could have been fixed during drafting in our opinion. There is no clear explanation for sapient and non-sapient, thus this would allow member nations to create their own definitions for these terms.
Reading the intro to this resolution wa agreed with preventing animal cruelty but later the proposal also prohibits gladiator fight and honorable duels, something a lot of member states (not including ourselves) still practise and/or see as tradition.

We think a resolution for animal rights, preventing animal cruelty or abuse would not only get the authors intended results if approved but will also more likely to be approved if written correctly (if there aren't any in the GA already).
Ctulhu is my first and only nation.

I'm a rightwing atheïst and try to approach all things with logic and reason.
I'm always open to discuss anything with anyone including religion, political opinions ... practically anything worth debating.

Socialism is the downfall of the economy.

User avatar
Ardiveds
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 191
Founded: Feb 28, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ardiveds » Mon Jun 01, 2020 6:31 am

Ctulhu wrote:Ctulhu will be voting against this proposal, we appreciate the intention behind the resolution but the execution lacks. This could have been fixed during drafting in our opinion. There is no clear explanation for sapient and non-sapient, thus this would allow member nations to create their own definitions for these terms.
Reading the intro to this resolution wa agreed with preventing animal cruelty but later the proposal also prohibits gladiator fight and honorable duels, something a lot of member states (not including ourselves) still practise and/or see as tradition.

We think a resolution for animal rights, preventing animal cruelty or abuse would not only get the authors intended results if approved but will also more likely to be approved if written correctly (if there aren't any in the GA already).

"Ambassador, we'd like to remind you that if a word is not defined in a resolution, members are expected to follow the common dictionary definition of the word. If a word is not defined in the resolution but has a clear definition in the dictionary and a member still decides to make up their own definition, the member would be in violation of GA #2 article 9 by not following the resolution in good faith."
Last edited by Ardiveds on Mon Jun 01, 2020 6:32 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Krishna Rashtra
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 15
Founded: Dec 23, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Krishna Rashtra » Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:24 am

"Krishna Rashtra supports this proposal. Blood sports as a form of quote unquote entertainment is an affront to our national values, not to mention absolutely reprehensible."

User avatar
Aclion
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5715
Founded: Apr 12, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Aclion » Mon Jun 01, 2020 2:11 pm

Heavens Reach wrote:
Viriles wrote:Unless amended to allow consented fights, this resolution is set to fail.


It doesn't disallow consented fights; just fights that are to the death.

Even fights that are to the death may not be covered. It would not be difficult to evade the restriction by setting up the fights so that they are not a sport.

Also i'm disappointed that the defintion still does not cover most non-consensual blood sports.
XKI: Recruiter, TITO Tactical Officer, Deputy WA Secretary, Emissary to Forest
TEP: Deputy Minister for WA affairs
Forest: Cartographer Emeritus
Oatland: Consul ,Caesar and Cartographer Emeritus
The people who participated in China's denial of their role in this outbreak deserve the same scorn and derision of those who've helped past regimes deny their own atrocities.

User avatar
Coconut Palm Island
Envoy
 
Posts: 315
Founded: Feb 16, 2018
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Coconut Palm Island » Mon Jun 01, 2020 2:37 pm

The Kingdom of Coconut Palm Island has voted for this resolution and cannot understand why the majority of nations have voted against it. Any sport involving humans or animals attempting to seriously injure or kill one another is wrong. While our nation tries not to regulate the personal lives of our citizens, even consensual fights to injure or kill are wrong. We believe that the "consent" for these events cannot be valid-- it usually comes out of fear, pressure, or financial distress.

Of course, the King is open to changing our vote, if someone can make a convincing case for allowing consensual fighting among humans. However, at this time, we can't see any reason not to vote for it.
The Kingdom of Coconut Palm Island
His Royal Majesty King Alexander
News: Criminal Rehabilitation Act passes with overwhelming support in the Senate and championed by the King. The act is a revision of a 2008 bill standardizing criminal sentencing.

User avatar
Auze
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1937
Founded: Oct 31, 2015
Democratic Socialists

Postby Auze » Mon Jun 01, 2020 2:56 pm

Ardiveds wrote:
Aslicuria wrote:"On Behalf of the Emperor, we must declare our objection to this proposal, simply as it prohibits our time-honored tradition of Hunting."

"Ambassador, I urge you to read the definition of 'blood sports' carefully."

"Have you ever tried to hunt your fellow man? It's quite fun."
Hello, I'm an LDS kid from South Carolina!
In case you're wondering, it's pronounced "Ah-zee".

Anyway, how about a game?
RIP LWDT & RWDT. Y'all did not go gentle into that good night.

User avatar
Hromos
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Aug 11, 2017
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Hromos » Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:04 pm

The resolution needs to be reworded. While the resolution is being put up "for the safety and protection of all sentient beings" it only discusses sapient and non-sapient living creatures. This doesn't necessarily include sentient AI or cyborgs. "Sapient" should be changed to "sentient", and "living beings" needs to be broadened.

User avatar
Heavens Reach
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 127
Founded: May 08, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Heavens Reach » Mon Jun 01, 2020 6:07 pm

Hromos wrote:The resolution needs to be reworded. While the resolution is being put up "for the safety and protection of all sentient beings" it only discusses sapient and non-sapient living creatures. This doesn't necessarily include sentient AI or cyborgs. "Sapient" should be changed to "sentient", and "living beings" needs to be broadened.


Sapient is a much stronger designation than sentient.

User avatar
Auze
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1937
Founded: Oct 31, 2015
Democratic Socialists

Postby Auze » Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:20 am

Hromos wrote:The resolution needs to be reworded. While the resolution is being put up "for the safety and protection of all sentient beings" it only discusses sapient and non-sapient living creatures. This doesn't necessarily include sentient AI or cyborgs. "Sapient" should be changed to "sentient", and "living beings" needs to be broadened.

“‘Sentient’ does not mean what you think it means. Lobsters are sentient, but humans are sapient.”
Hello, I'm an LDS kid from South Carolina!
In case you're wondering, it's pronounced "Ah-zee".

Anyway, how about a game?
RIP LWDT & RWDT. Y'all did not go gentle into that good night.

User avatar
Ardiveds
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 191
Founded: Feb 28, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ardiveds » Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:39 am

Auze wrote:
Ardiveds wrote:"Ambassador, I urge you to read the definition of 'blood sports' carefully."

"Have you ever tried to hunt your fellow man? It's quite fun."

"Uhhhhhh..." the kaiser looks rather weirded out "I see, you are probably in violation of more than a couple resolutions but I understand."

User avatar
Savoir
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 11
Founded: Jun 17, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Savoir » Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:50 am

Ancient Greek Empire wrote:ACKNOWLEDGING that sports such as bullfighting, cockfighting and dogfighting are popular amongst member nations;

"This is false. Bullfighting, cockfighting, and dogfighting are not popular in Savoir. We are a cultured and sophisticated nation. We prefer the subtle blood sport of gladiatorial cleansing of the Unwanted Inferiors, minorities whom we in Savoir regard as animals."
2. Prohibits all forms of blood sports in which one or more of the participants did not provide consent;

"How can a creature without intelligence, without the power of deliberation, provide consent? Thus, this clause does not apply to Savoir's preferred blood sport, in which the quarry is unable to choose and has no will, thus forfeiting its choices to a more intelligent being."
3. Prohibits all forms of blood sports in which the aim is to kill the opponent, despite consent;

"The aim is not to kill the quarry, whom it is not even appropriate to label as an opponent because there is simply no competition between it and the genetically superior killer. The aim of the sport of gladiatorial cleansing is to provide pleasure and amusement to the Sachant race."
5. Encourages member states to relocate all captive former non-sapient blood sport participants to a safe and healthy rehabilitative environment, such as their natural habitat, where they will not destroy the environment, be harmed or harm others;

"This is not possible. In the natural environment of the Unwanted Inferiors, these savages will simply kill and harm each other. These primitive men, and I use that word very loosely, are unfit to rule themselves. For their own safety, they must remain under the control of the various institutions in Savoir. It must be mentioned that their deaths at our hands are far more humane than what the thugs would do to each other if left to their own devices."
6. Encourages members states to humanely put down non-sapient creatures groomed for blood sports if rehabilitation is not possible.

"Humanely putting down the Unwanted Inferiors takes away all the fun! Gone will be the spectacle, the razzle-dazzle! We must put down non-sapient creatures with style! Of course, rehabilitation of the Unwanted Inferior is not possible anyway due to subpar genetics, so their problems are inherent in their being. It is impossible to reform them, so they must be liquidated."

"Fellow fascists, all those who are voting against this proposal, I salute you!"

:: Ambassadeur Nicolas Savoie, comte de Chambéry
Last edited by Savoir on Tue Jun 02, 2020 2:30 am, edited 12 times in total.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads