PASSED: Access to Science in Schools

[Glen-Rhodes]

If the only solution that the supporters of this resolution can give, when it comes to the university issue, is to stop providing much-needed financial aid so that students of all socioeconomic backgrounds can attend private universities, it makes me wonder whether or not they support education, or merely support science. Whatever long-term effects may come out this resolution, they will certainly not be ones that lead to greater socioeconomic or educational prosperity. The supporters tend to ask that the opponents looks past the obviously flawed language in the statue, and instead take a look at the broad picture of education & creativity mandates. Well, I say to the supporters that merely because the resolution's default subtitle is "A resolution to promote funding and the development of education and the arts", does not mean that the law provided actually does so.

All of our arguments have been given, even if the rebuttals supplied had not been satisfactory. It is clear that the cheerleaders of this resolution are devout in that fact, and attempting to point out their fallibility is futile on even our best days. Those opponents that so vehemently abhor this resolution should take comfort on this coming Tuesday that, if "Access to Science in Schools" passes, a repeal will be immediately given to the General Assembly for discussion, and shortly thereafter submitted for vote.

Dr. Bradford Castro
Chief Ambassador, FAA
Regional Delegate, Jordia

[Absolvability]

If the only solution that the supporters of this resolution can give, when it comes to the university issue, is to stop providing much-needed financial aid so that students of all socioeconomic backgrounds can attend private universities, it makes me wonder whether or not they support education, or merely support science.

Science seems to be, primarily, the area of education with the most controversy surrounding it. You may assume this to be the cause of any inadvertant preference we've displayed.

You might find, upon closer examination, that my nation (since I don't intend to speak for anybody else, even if they are on my side in this particular debate,) does not share the problems you're presently having with socioeconomic backgrounds. Precisely because we support education. These are the long-term effects of which I speak.

Those opponents that so vehemently abhor this resolution should take comfort on this coming Tuesday that, if "Access to Science in Schools" passes, a repeal will be immediately given to the General Assembly for discussion, and shortly thereafter submitted for vote.

I am looking forward to the ensuing repeal more than anyone, Ambassador. Though it seems strange to me that the first collective vote should not satisfy you (as to the opinions of others, that is,) I will be equally satisfied by the first... second... and third.

[Flibbleites]

This is the best proposal I've ever seen

Considering how long you've been here, that's not saying much.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Philadawk]

Sorry if I'm bringing up a point that has already been discussed.

I think my main concern is that the bill both enforce freedom of religion - not school curriculum should ask students to sacrifice or ignore their religious beliefs in order to embrace a scientific theory - and allows for the teaching of science.

Would it be better if this bill called for schools to create safe spaces for constructive discussion in which science is taught and all students have their rights respected equally? I fear that although this seems to be the goal of this resolution, it leaves too many openings on both sides.

[The Realm of The Realm]

If my neighbor state has a crazy, superstitious culture, am I wrong to be willing to allow them to be hobbled by their delusions? Why must I impose the expectation that science be taught on a no-less-equal footing with mystical (non-scientific) explanations of the world and how things work?

There is a natural selection process at the culture level. Trying to impose "science" in education is like trying to impose "love" in sex -- there will be no end of disagreement on what is or is not generally accepted as science, particularly in cultures where delusional religions have some sway.

More respectful of national sovereignty, and more realistic, would be to establish a WA clearinghouse for science education, to match "generally accepted science" to the corresponding myths which the science "busts". This creates an globally accessible utility.

Let the religion-dazed and crazed take what they can from such a utility, and may they learn and profit from such. When religiously-inspired mystical explanations of the universe are shown, again and again, to fall short of the science, eventually the concept will sink in.

Until then, I will prefer to let my crazy neighbors keep their crazy. And as someone said above "Get your grubby hands off my public school curriculum" .... the source of WA resolutions such as this is, evidently, boredom and lack of creativity. The proposed resolution has NOTHING of substance to do with international, inter-regional, or global political or economic issues. It seems to me to be the work of "one-worlder" busibodies.

[The Krunk Collective]

Keep in mind that this resolution does not recognize evolution as absolute, undeniable fact, but rather as theory. The resolution is meant to encourage open-minded scientific/religious debate in hopes of enlightening the world populace.

[Absolvability]

More respectful of national sovereignty, and more realistic, would be to establish a WA clearinghouse for science education, to match "generally accepted science" to the corresponding myths which the science "busts". This creates an globally accessible utility.

Let the religion-dazed and crazed take what they can from such a utility, and may they learn and profit from such. When religiously-inspired mystical explanations of the universe are shown, again and again, to fall short of the science, eventually the concept will sink in.

Well, though I don't know exactly what a 'clearinghouse' is... basically what you describe is EXACTLY what this resolution does. Presumably the defining line is the difference between a clearinghouse and a school. However, you go on to suggest that this will create a globally accessible utility. Well... what's more global than schools?

I can respect the fact that you believe especially religious nations should be entitled to their own views. And they are certainly not banned from having them. Nor are they banned from teaching them in public schools beyond the fact that equal time must be devoted to science. In the end anybody who wants to show preference to religion still can... since this resolution doesn't effect private schools, and it certainly doesn't effect churches. In the end an International body MUST make decisions for/with other people... and we can only really adhere to our own sense of moral decency and objectivity.

So if you find some small flaw in the resolution... or you would've done it slightly differently... but you still agree with the message in general, don't vote against it. This is a very touchy subject that has been the source of debate for some time. This resolution has come a long way and REQUIRES follow-through.

Keep in mind that this resolution does not recognize evolution as absolute, undeniable fact, but rather as theory. The resolution is meant to encourage open-minded scientific/religious debate in hopes of enlightening the world populace.

Well said, Ambassador.

[Goobergunchia]

I am afraid that we find the objections to requiring a science portion of, say, our public art academy's curriculum overwhelm our support for science in schools. As a result, Goobergunchia votes against. Artists, musicians, and lawyers get all the science they need in secondary school, anyway. I mean, I learned this very useful skill in my physics class!

Darren reaches under the Goobergunchian delegation's desk, pulls out two custard pies, and throws one at the ambassador from Urgench and the other at the ambassador from Sionis Prioratus.

[Acting Lord] Darren Funkel
Chief Deputy Goobergunchian UN Ambassador

[Sionis Prioratus]

I am afraid that we find the objections to requiring a science portion of, say, our public art academy's curriculum overwhelm our support for science in schools. As a result, Goobergunchia votes against. Artists, musicians, and lawyers get all the science they need in secondary school, anyway. I mean, I learned this very useful skill in my physics class!

That's due (in part) to Education and Creativity's sub-categories:

1) Artistic
2) Educational
3) Cultural Heritage
4) Free Press

I had to choose one, I am not (nor is anyone else) allowed to mix sub-categories, as far as I know. I comprehend it may not bring comfort, but that's what in my mind I thought I had to do.

Darren reaches under the Goobergunchian delegation's desk, pulls out two custard pies, and throws one at the ambassador from Urgench and the other at the ambassador from Sionis Prioratus.

[Acting Lord] Darren Funkel
Chief Deputy Goobergunchian UN Ambassador

(His Imperial Majesty Adrian de Saint-Clair wiping cream-covered face and Crown with The Royal Cape made from lion skin)
"-Damn it! What a mess! At least it is quite tasty, thank you. May I have the recipe?"

Yours,

[Lumatrika]

This is a disgusting piece of legislation.

Acknowledging that there are no absolute truths in science is commendable, but demanding that RELGIOUS views be afforded equal time to scientific theories is appalling.

Scientific theories are based on research - solid, researched theories that are open to change as new evidence is presented. Some scientists may not accept the change, but the scientific evidence behind some individual prejudice cannot be argued with. Religious theory has no basis in scientific fact - it is based on the worldview of whoever writes and lays down the religious texts at the time - often many centuries ago. We have evolved and learnt since then - we have become more educated, and understand more of the universe we live in (or at least accept the huge gaps we need to fill in!).

Religion is close-minded, unwilling to change and inflexible, and demanding to have it put alongside scientific study in schools is breathtaking in its naievity. Scientists sometimes find it difficult to accept change, but religious leaders are often UNWILLING to accept change, even when evidence is placed squarely in front of them.

Keep religion out of science lessons and firmly in RE / RS lessons where they belong - or are religious communities so afraid that their own religion won't stand up well when discussed, openly, in comparison with other religions.

Allow scientific theory alone to be discussed in science lessons - make it open, make it rigourous, make the children question and discuss the theories, but don't allow the waters to be muddied because of religious texts written millennia ago.

[Sionis Prioratus]

Acknowledging that there are no absolute truths in science is commendable, but demanding that RELGIOUS views be afforded equal time to scientific theories is appalling.

I humbly ask the Hon. Ambassador to reread the text, in relevant part, there seems to have occured a misunderstanding:

ENCOURAGING schools to adopt religious diversity awareness courses, as long as it helps promote greater tolerance and understanding between different peoples,

[...]

4. Whenever Religious views acknowledged as opposing peer-reviewed scientific theories are part of a school curriculum, the time allocated for teaching said peer-reviewed scientific theories in said schools shall be at least the same time that is allocated for said Religious views.

ENCOURAGES, not MANDATES.

If religious views are NOT part of your nation's school curricula, as it seems to be your case, then section 4 does not apply to them. Only if "Religious views acknowledged as opposing peer-reviewed scientific theories [were] part of [your] school[s] curricul[a]", it then would, but again, it is not the case. You do not have to teach religion, unless you should want, and evidently you do not.

Yours,

[Commie kitler]

Access to Science in Schools is the Way to go for a better future


Vote is up to you

[The Realm of The Realm]

Well, though I don't know exactly what a 'clearinghouse' is... basically what you describe is EXACTLY what this resolution does. Presumably the defining line is the difference between a clearinghouse and a school. However, you go on to suggest that this will create a globally accessible utility. Well... what's more global than schools?

I can respect the fact that you believe especially religious nations should be entitled to their own views. And they are certainly not banned from having them. Nor are they banned from teaching them in public schools beyond the fact that equal time must be devoted to science. In the end anybody who wants to show preference to religion still can... since this resolution doesn't effect private schools, and it certainly doesn't effect churches. In the end an International body MUST make decisions for/with other people... and we can only really adhere to our own sense of moral decency and objectivity.

So if you find some small flaw in the resolution... or you would've done it slightly differently... but you still agree with the message in general, don't vote against it. This is a very touchy subject that has been the source of debate for some time. This resolution has come a long way and REQUIRES follow-through.

This resolution exceeds the reach of the WA -- it interferes with matters which are purely domestic for no compelling international, inter-regional, or global purpose. I am FOR science, but I am AGAINST legislation mandating even "equal time" for science in education. (My nation will not even give one-tenth time to mystical explanations of the universe in any education curriculum, but I will vote NAY and encourage others to vote NAY when you try to impose science on those who are religiously deluded. Show cause how a nation with mystical beliefs about "evolution" creates a liability or cause of action to be taken up by other nations.)

A test of the "scope of remit" of the WA is simple: If a WA nation refused (hypothetically) to obey some WA resolution X, would you be willing to invade that WA nation to force the people to obey resolution X? To try the leaders of the nation for breaking WA law?

If a WA nation refuses to recognize maritime boundary limits and attacks ships of other flags in international waters ... yes, I would be willing to invade / wage war as necessary to compel that nation's adherence to the established WA convention.

Not teaching "science" along with "mystical stories"? Hardly a chance I'd offer even one dollar to support such an intervention.

Let's stop trying to make WA laws for which no one (in their right minds) would be willing to compel enforcement upon a nation.

And let's also remember that "Science" consists of those hypotheses which have not yet been disproved. But this means they are not-yet-disproved, not "truths" that ~are~ proved. I'll be looking for your rationalization of why one group of unproved "truths" (called Science) should be internationally, inter-regionally, globally given dominant support in favor of another set of unproved truths (called Mystical Stories). I've labeled this as "dominant support" because the law proposed requires Science but allows Mystical Stories to be ignored.


BTW: A clearinghouse ... an Institute ... is a repository, like a LIBRARY which actively collects, from all WA nations, what it can obtain on a subject matter, and rapidly makes any updated information available to WA nations. What is more global than a school? A library, it seems, although asking the question that way seems to be an ends-means argument to begin with.

The difference between a library and a school is like the difference between broadcast television versus "on-demand" programming. The school produces and performs an active information dissemination function to a captive audience; a library provides access to information only to those students who seek it out. (Actually, the clearinghouse would provide access to science education information to those who design the nation's curricula rather than to the nation's students themselves.)

[Frattastan]

Category: Education and Creativity / Area of Effect: Educational
ACKNOWLEDGING that in science there are no absolute truths; scientific theories, for example Gravity and Evolution, are subject to be proven wrong.
ACKNOWLEDGING that international prohibition of Religious views in a school setting is contrarian to the principles stated above, therefore no nation shall ever be deprived of the freedom of exposing their young to Religious worldviews, should said nation see it fit,
RESOLVES:
1. Inclusion of peer-reviewed science in schools’ curricula shall from now on be mandatory in public schools and schools that receive governmental aid.

2. Funding for such inclusion shall come from the national education budget and/or – upon request and/or acceptance – from nations willing to provide funding, related reading, human resources, or other resources deemed necessary according to the parties involved.

4. Whenever Religious views acknowledged as opposing peer-reviewed scientific theories are part of a school curriculum, the time allocated for teaching said peer-reviewed scientific theories in said schools shall be at least the same time that is allocated for said Religious views.

6. For even greater clarity, exposure to scientific theories views shall never, ever be a vehicle – be it by objective of subjective means, or any other means – to force acceptance of scientific theories. Freedom of conscience is paramount, and a person can be exposed to scientific theories and reject them altogether for itself, without any negative consequences whatsoever in what regards a person’s public life.

This resolution is mere reaction.
1. Science can be universally proven using the scientific method. Religion is a matter of faith, cannot be universally proven and is subject to freedom of conscience.
2. Why a secular state should spend taxpayers' money in teaching religion in schools ? And why it should give to religion the same time allocated for science ?
3. Science is made of proven theories. "Peer-reviewed" theories are distortions of the objective reality, adapted to political or religious doctrines.
4. And WTF it means that "Gravity" is "subject to be proven wrong" ?

Horrible, disgusting resolution. It must be stopped immediately.

[Frattastan]

Keep in mind that this resolution does not recognize evolution as absolute, undeniable fact, but rather as theory. The resolution is meant to encourage open-minded scientific/religious debate in hopes of enlightening the world populace.

What about Gravity ?

Denial of gravity isn't an "open-minded scientific/religious debate". It's totalitarian dictatorship.
And if I say that "2 + 2 = 5"* ?


* Nineteen Eighty-Four, by George Orwell

[Charlotte Ryberg]

...Those opponents that so vehemently abhor this resolution should take comfort on this coming Tuesday that, if "Access to Science in Schools" passes, a repeal will be immediately given to the General Assembly for discussion, and shortly thereafter submitted for vote.

Dr. Bradford Castro
Chief Ambassador, FAA
Regional Delegate, Jordia

Good one, Dr. Castro. You're welcome to adapt my reasoning for my opposition (best left at national level, that is).

-- Ms. Sarah Harper

[Urgench]

I am afraid that we find the objections to requiring a science portion of, say, our public art academy's curriculum overwhelm our support for science in schools. As a result, Goobergunchia votes against. Artists, musicians, and lawyers get all the science they need in secondary school, anyway. I mean, I learned this very useful skill in my physics class!

Darren reaches under the Goobergunchian delegation's desk, pulls out two custard pies, and throws one at the ambassador from Urgench and the other at the ambassador from Sionis Prioratus.

[Acting Lord] Darren Funkel
Chief Deputy Goobergunchian UN Ambassador

At that moment Ambassador Mongkha's rather nervous assistant, Tarmashirin of Herat, walked in front of his master to pick up a bale of documents, the custard pie hit him directly on the side of the face, Tarmashirin struggled with the surprise for a moment and then huge round tears welled out of his eyes and his face went red as a beet. Ambassador Mongkha seeing this was momentarily rather amused, but his natural compassion overcame him,

"Sit Tarmashirin, sit down, the Goobergunchian meant nothing by it, don't be upset now. I will call the Shaman from Trans-Baikalia. He will doubtless have little to say and much to do. I imagine we shall have some fun when the Shaman comes. That De Saint Clair chap will undoubtedly get right up the Shaman's nose. " Mongkha helps Tarmashirin sit down and get the custard out of his fur hat.

Then, and almost as if the mention of him had summoned him, the Shaman appears in the doorway of the chamber. His evil smell of damp rotting vegetation, wild animals and unwashed old man fill the air around him like a fog. Delegations recoil from him as he shambles past them, the hundreds of tiny tarnished brass mirrors sown on to the Reindeer skins he wears jingle, as the shaman grins obscenely. As he approaches the Urgenchi delegation the Shaman, not an especially kindly man, notices the distress of Tarmashirin of Herat, and is suddenly overcome with the urge to destroy them that have caused this gentle soul such anguish.

From his back the Shaman snatches his bear skin drum, and from the bag tied with reindeer gut to his belt he draws his serpent shaped drumstick. He beats his drum gently at first, and begins to sing the throat song of the storm, a queer noise like a hum and buzz emanates from deep inside his chest, quietly at first, but growing louder. The Shaman stamps his foot, and the pieces of custard pie still stuck to Tarmashirin of Herat and those pieces which have dropped to the floor around him suddenly fly in to the air and hang there as though suspended on tiny invisible strings, they grow in size, and gradually form themselves in to dozens of full sized pies, all floating in the air.

The Shaman's song grows louder, and makes the pens and glasses on near by desks vibrate and rattle, the brass mirrors and pieces of filthy ribbon sown on to the shaman's clothes sway and jingle loudly as he sways and begins to dance. A strong smell of frozen marsh and hoar frosted pine and birch, fills the entire debating chamber. The cloud of pies surrounding Taramshirin of Herat begins to move, getting faster with the shaman's singing and dancing, they swirl getting ever faster and faster, creating a whirling tornado of pies.

The Shaman stamps his foot and shouts something in old Buryat Mongol, and the storm of pies shoots across the room, it engulfs the delegation of Goobergunchia, and then whirls on towards the delegation of Sionis Prioratus, the look of shock on the face of Ambassador De Saint Clair is only visible for a second before the unholy tornado of pastry and egg based pie filling is upon him.

The Shaman's song stops.

The smell of the Taiga abates, and where the delegations of Goobergunchia and Sionis Prioratus once sat all that can now be seen is two large piles of shattered custard pie, the room is silent for the a second and then both piles shift slightly as the delegations buried beneath them claw themselves free, shocked and stinking of sweet eggy goodness, but unharmed.

The Shaman snorts his approval, and slumps down in to the chair next to Ambassador Mongkha and promptly falls asleep, snoring and stinking.

[Absolvability]

There are certain arguements that are difficult to address. Ambassadors who think that this is a good measure in 9 out of 10 ways... have already implemented something similar in their own nation... but do not want to support something that they believe is not within the WA's jurisdiction. Which almost seems to imply that the resolution is illegal. It certainly is not. However, such opinions are not at all ill-founded. I suspect they belong to very wise Ambassadors. It is unfortunate that the real world is not quite so enlightened and that we require 'stepping stones,' to reach a better end so that... in the future, perhaps, we can reach a perfect end.

An arguement that I would like to address, however, is the abrupt inclusion of science in Art schools. I suspect, as I have all along, that some Ambassadors are not being very creative here. We have already had this arguement with regard to Kindergarten classes. We do not propose to teach evolution or quantum physics to Kindergarteners. This resolution simply says that science will be included. Each nation may CERTAINLY choose the most appropriate branch. Very young children, for example, may be shown pictures of animals. Perhaps even some brief and colorful lessons.

Now lets carry this over to Art school. Do you not think an art student would benefit from an anatomy class? Physiology? I think... if we regard this resolution with cleansed eyes we will find it's not so invasive. Science is a very broad subject. It's hard to think of a subject that wouldn't benefit from it.

What about Gravity ?

Denial of gravity isn't an "open-minded scientific/religious debate". It's totalitarian dictatorship.

Well, I would tend to agree. You'd be surprised to find all the 'facts' we live with that are scientifically regarded as 'theory' however. Theory, in scientific terms, still implies a more than reasonable amount of certainty, whatever it may mean anywhere else. And if Theory carries that much weight, then imagine what Fact must carry. In order for something to be a Fact it must be absolute. On Earth, for example, I believe gravity is 9.9mps^2 or something like that. That is a measurement of acceleration. Acceleration is altered by wind resistance, which is why objects fall at (almost) the same speed on the moon but not on the Earth. The gravity of Earth is decided by its mass. Jupiter has more gravity than Earth, for example. These are reasons why gravity is not absolute, and therefore, is not a Fact. I think this is a very good way to go about things... since we have members of the WA that exist in various unique and exciting places.

[Sionis Prioratus]

4. And WTF it means that "Gravity" is "subject to be proven wrong" ?

I mean theories of gravity, as Evolution theories... There's Oldton's theory of gravity, Einstone's theory of gravity, Rhieland's theory of gravity... As far as religion goes, some people believe in Intelligent Falling, instead of gravity, much like Creationism.

[Sionis Prioratus]

4. Whenever Religious views acknowledged as opposing peer-reviewed scientific theories are part of a school curriculum, the time allocated for teaching said peer-reviewed scientific theories in said schools shall be at least the same time that is allocated for said Religious views.

This resolution is mere reaction.

[...]
2. Why a secular state should spend taxpayers' money in teaching religion in schools ? And why it should give to religion the same time allocated for science ?

Once more, no problem. I humbly ask the Hon. Ambassador to reread the text, in relevant part, there seems to have occured a misunderstanding:

ENCOURAGING schools to adopt religious diversity awareness courses, as long as it helps promote greater tolerance and understanding between different peoples,

[...]

4. Whenever Religious views acknowledged as opposing peer-reviewed scientific theories are part of a school curriculum, the time allocated for teaching said peer-reviewed scientific theories in said schools shall be at least the same time that is allocated for said Religious views.

ENCOURAGES, not MANDATES.

If religious views are NOT part of your nation's school curricula, as it seems to be your case, then section 4 does not apply to them. Only if "Religious views acknowledged as opposing peer-reviewed scientific theories [were] part of [your] school[s] curricul[a]", it then would, but again, it is not the case. You do not have to teach religion, unless you should want, and evidently you do not.

Yours,

[Australian Labor Party]

To: Kevin Ruddpet, Prime Minister
cc: Steven Smithpet, Foreign Minister

From: Julia Gillpet, Deputy Prime Minister & Education Minister

Hi, Guys.

I recommend we vote against this proposal. It doesn't have anything worthwhile to say about science in schools, whether public or private. What it does do is allow gobbledygook to be taught in private schools. This is against the principles of a national curriculum.

Regards. Jules.

[Sionis Prioratus]

What it does do is allow gobbledygook to be taught in private schools.

It allows sovereign parents to choose to pay (or have someone else pay for them) to allow their kids to be exposed to "gobbledygook".

Yours,

[Urgench]

To: Kevin Ruddpet, Prime Minister
cc: Steven Smithpet, Foreign Minister

From: Julia Gillpet, Deputy Prime Minister & Education Minister

Hi, Guys.

I recommend we vote against this proposal. It doesn't have anything worthwhile to say about science in schools, whether public or private. What it does do is allow gobbledygook to be taught in private schools. This is against the principles of a national curriculum.

Regards. Jules.

A large part of this statute is also illegal since it conflicts with the already passed resolution #35, the Charter of Civil Rights, since it creates a form of socioeconomic discrimination in provision of education by exempting private schools from regulation in the matter of teaching science and religion.

The result would be that member states would have to either nationalise all of their schools to remain in compliance with this statute and resolution #35 or privatise all of their schools in order to avoid having to implement the discriminatory provisions of this statute.


Yours,

[Absolvability]

A large part of this statute is also illegal since it conflicts with the already passed resolution #35, the Charter of Civil Rights, since it creates a form of socioeconomic discrimination in provision of education by exempting private schools from regulation in the matter of teaching science and religion.

This resolution is most certainly NOT creating a socioeconomic discrimination. If one already exists then that is just too damn bad. Private Schools were exempt from this resolution because it would've been illegal to include them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_school
"Private schools, also known as independent schools, are not administered by local, state or national governments; thus, they retain the right to select their students and are funded in whole or in part by charging their students tuition, rather than relying on public (state) funds."

That is, despite what the honored Ambassador of Urgench and the good Doctor of Glen-Rhodes think, the definition of a Private school. If a Private school is not administered by a national government then it can not be managed by an International one either.

Private schools are left untouched by this resolution in order to maintain the rights granted in the CoCR. The good Ambassador from Urgench is trying to refute this resolution from so many angles that he is contradicting himself at times.

[Urgench]

A large part of this statute is also illegal since it conflicts with the already passed resolution #35, the Charter of Civil Rights, since it creates a form of socioeconomic discrimination in provision of education by exempting private schools from regulation in the matter of teaching science and religion.

This resolution is most certainly NOT creating a socioeconomic discrimination. If one already exists then that is just too damn bad. Private Schools were exempt from this resolution because it would've been illegal to include them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_school
"Private schools, also known as independent schools, are not administered by local, state or national governments; thus, they retain the right to select their students and are funded in whole or in part by charging their students tuition, rather than relying on public (state) funds."

That is, despite what the honored Ambassador of Urgench and the good Doctor of Glen-Rhodes think, the definition of a Private school. If a Private school is not administered by a national government then it can not be managed by an International one either.

Private schools are left untouched by this resolution in order to maintain the rights granted in the CoCR. The good Ambassador from Urgench is trying to refute this resolution from so many angles that he is contradicting himself at times.

This is utterly false. The CoCR requires member governments to eliminate discrimination in private businesses and nongovernmental organisation, employment, and all services provided to the public be they private or otherwise. Therefore member governments cannot allow only public schools to teach scientific contradictions to religious ideas, while exempting private schools since this would represent a form of discrimination, in this case based on socioeconomic background.

The CoCR also requires states to treat all of their inhabitants equally under the law and under the actions of the law, this statute expressly only effects those in public schools therefore the clause containing the exemption of private schools is illegal, doubly so.


Yours,