[DEFEATED] Transhuman Freedom and Acceptance Act

[Vesintor]

Transhuman Freedom and Acceptance Act
ACKNOWLEDGING an individual’s right to do with his or her own body what they will, as long as it doesn’t violate another’s rights;

UNDERSTANDING that with today’s growing technology, people have the ability to modify themselves for aesthetic, health-related, and performance-enhancing purposes;

FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGING these technologies have the potential to affect the human race for the better, if utilized with care;

Definitions:

TRANSHUMANISM is hereby defined as an field of study relating to the use of science and technology to improve human mental and physical characteristics and capacities

INDIVIDUALS (as used in this resolution) are hereby defined as citizens that have reached the age of majority and are regarded as mentally competent in their nation.

TRANSHUMAN INDIVIDUALS are hereby defined as individuals that have chosen to use science and technology to improve human mental and physical
characteristics and capacities, as was defined above.

MODIFICATION(as used in this resolution) is hereby defined as any and all of the following:

• Gene manipulation (extraction of an individual’s genes, injection of genes, gene splicing)

• Artificial limbs implemented in an individual

• Laboratory grown organs or appendages implemented in an individual

• RFID chips/any other type of chip that can be inserted under the skin (excluding wood chips) implemented in an individual

• Implementation of nanobots in an individual

• Any mechanical/tech device that has become a permanent part of the individual (Ex: HUD overlay on retina)

The WA hereby decrees:

• No nation shall pass a law prohibiting the implementation of a modification in an individual that has given informed consent to have it implemented;

• Transhuman individuals will be treated as equals, with the same rights and laws applying to them as to any other human being

• Modification of any individual without their informed consent is hereby prohibited and recognized as criminal;

• In addition, the World Assembly hereby founds BRETH (Bureau for the Research and Ethics of Transhumanism)

• Modification of any human beings that do not fall under the definition of an individual as defined above will require the informed consent of an advocate, and will be deemed criminal if decided by BRETH to be cruel or harmful to the human being in question.

BRETH’s purpose is to discuss the ethics of the various fields of transhumanist technologies; and to discuss future applications of technology in the realm of transhumanism. BRETH hereby has the power to decide whether a modification is cruel or harmful to a human being not falling under the definition of an individual, thus making it criminal.

Please note, this is a resolution to improve human rights.

Comments and criticism are appreciated.
Any ideas to improve this resolution?

EDIT:I have put this proposal up for vote, We'd appreciate your support.

[Genomita]

Seeing how genetic modification and bio-augmentation are commonplace in the community of Genomita, you have our full support.

[The Altani Confederacy]

We have no problem with this draft, in theory. We do warn that you'll probably find some resistance from less enlightened delegations, or ones with a distrust of technology.

We would also like to see some kind of provision included to provide stronger protections for people to prevent them being subjected to unethical or dangerous research or treatments falling under the scope of this draft. Merely ensuring the consent of the people receiving these treatments or modifications is not enough - it must be informed consent, with real punishments for any potential mad scientists out there.

Sophie Fournier
Delegate-elect of Lavinium
Altani WA Representative to the World Assembly
Chief Diplomatic Representative of Poivre Atoll

[Vesintor]

Thanks for the recommendation, I've changed the wording to "informed consent"

I do, however, believe that punishment for non-consensual medical testing/surgery has already been covered in previous resolutions such as the Medical Research Ethics Act.

[Genomita]

We completely agree with the honorable ambassador of the Atlani Confederacy. It is important that people who might receive this treatment are made fully aware of the changes the treatment wil incur in their bodies and minds.

[Vesintor]

That is entirely up to the discretion of the individuals.

The WA cannot possibly screen and test every modification proposed.

It is up to the individual to judge whether they want a procedure or modification done based on the information they are given.

[Zyorlerinaza]

This looks like a pretty stable piece of legislation, with only a couple of aspects of clarifaction needed

- the opening points of acknowledgement place Transhumanism in a definition giving respect to altering mental capabilities, yet besides discussion to genetic alterations, has nothing within the wording of the act in what kinds of "Mind-Altering" procedures are protected.

- does this leave the door open for states to mandate transhuman surgeries through self-propogated judicial precedent?

- I feel like the definition of "transhumanism" in it's entirety lacks objectivity. To say that it is an international movement in culture and intellect is assuming this will become a majoritive action by all nations included. Perhaps making it:

transhumanism - Act pertaining to any and all individuals that have undergone a change in anatomic orientation through the use of science and technological advancement.

Feel free to negate or engage me on these.

[Quelesh]

We also support this idea, with a couple recommendations.

First, we advise a change to this clause: "Individuals may undergo surgery for the implementation of chips, mechanical limbs, or organs without government restriction." The phrase "without government restriction" means that governments can impose no conditions at all on the availability of these types of surgery (such as the informed consent of the recipient, safety procedures, medical qualifications, etc.). The clause above this one prevents governments from criminalizing these procedures if informed consent is given, but informed consent should also be mentioned in this clause to protect those who do not give it.

Second, we would like a clause explicitly guaranteeing that individuals also have the right to not have such procedures done (i.e. governments cannot force people to undergo them).

[Charlotte Ryberg]

In addition we feel that this resolution could go on to say that no humans will be forced to have RFID or robotic components implanted against their will (sic). Seeing that there's a sizeable concern about RFID implantation that might be worth an inclusion here or alternatively, as a separate draft which I might investigate.

- Ms. S. Harper.

[The Irish Marchlands]

Despite The Irish Marchland's general pro-technological advancement, we must insist we oppose this Legislation. Given that our Constitution stipulates a definition of a Human Being in order to be a 'fit and rightful subject and citizen', recognition of those with augments as 'Transhumans' causes conflicts and brings the citizenship of those citizens with augments in our Nation into disrepute and conjecture. Augmentation is perfectly legal within the Marchlands however, for strictly medical purposes, and not as an individual 'right' as there is no justifiable reason, given by this legislation other then a vague 'potential to affect the human race for the better', to convince us. The Marchland, sends its regrets to the Assembly and makes known it opposition to this legislation and its refusal to recognise Transhumanism as a legitimate Cultural and Intellectual movement on the world stage.
With Apologies, Lord Crugh,

[Strategion]

We have no problems with the concept of transhumanism. However, it appears that this part of the resolution:

Individuals may undergo surgery for the implementation of chips, mechanical limbs, or organs without government restriction

would appear to force us to recognize transsexuals and to allow transsexual surgery, which is currently illegal in Strategion and presumably in other WA countries as well.

Is there a way to modify this clause, perhaps with express mention that transhuman surgery would be for the purpose of transforming individuals into transhumans as defined previously? If not, we will be against the resolution if it comes up for voting ):

[Meekinos]

We have no problems with the concept of transhumanism. However, it appears that this part of the resolution:

Individuals may undergo surgery for the implementation of chips, mechanical limbs, or organs without government restriction

would appear to force us to recognize transsexuals and to allow transsexual surgery, which is currently illegal in Strategion and presumably in other WA countries as well.

Is there a way to modify this clause, perhaps with express mention that transhuman surgery would be for the purpose of transforming individuals into transhumans as defined previously? If not, we will be against the resolution if it comes up for voting ):

What a pity that this proposal won't currently allow you to discriminate against individuals who you revile because they do not fit into a certain sexual description.

Your sentiments merely reinforce the need to have transsexuals given equal protection and allow for the surgery.

[The Irish Marchlands]

We have no problems with the concept of transhumanism. However, it appears that this part of the resolution:

would appear to force us to recognize transsexuals and to allow transsexual surgery, which is currently illegal in Strategion and presumably in other WA countries as well.

Is there a way to modify this clause, perhaps with express mention that transhuman surgery would be for the purpose of transforming individuals into transhumans as defined previously? If not, we will be against the resolution if it comes up for voting ):

What a pity that this proposal won't currently allow you to discriminate against individuals who you revile because they do not fit into a certain sexual description.

Your sentiments merely reinforce the need to have transsexuals given equal protection and allow for the surgery.

With all due respect to the honourable ambassador from Meekinos, no it doesn't.

[Strategion]

We have no problems with the concept of transhumanism. However, it appears that this part of the resolution:

would appear to force us to recognize transsexuals and to allow transsexual surgery, which is currently illegal in Strategion and presumably in other WA countries as well.

Is there a way to modify this clause, perhaps with express mention that transhuman surgery would be for the purpose of transforming individuals into transhumans as defined previously? If not, we will be against the resolution if it comes up for voting ):

What a pity that this proposal won't currently allow you to discriminate against individuals who you revile because they do not fit into a certain sexual description.

Your sentiments merely reinforce the need to have transsexuals given equal protection and allow for the surgery.

We do not revile them. We pity them because thinking you're something you're not is obviously a sign of mental illness, and we take relevant steps to treat them. Encouraging their delusion isn't healthy.

Anyway, feel free to propose a resolution regarding transsexuals if you think there's such a need, and we can discuss it there.

[Meekinos]

What a pity that this proposal won't currently allow you to discriminate against individuals who you revile because they do not fit into a certain sexual description.

Your sentiments merely reinforce the need to have transsexuals given equal protection and allow for the surgery.

We do not revile them. We pity them because thinking you're something you're not is obviously a sign of mental illness, and we take relevant steps to treat them. Encouraging their delusion isn't healthy.

Anyway, feel free to propose a resolution regarding transsexuals if you think there's such a need, and we can discuss it there.

Then you obviously must punish children for pretending to be super heroes and the like since they may thing they are a superhero, or a princess or anything else imaginative. After all, according to what you wrote, it is a sign of mental illness.

[The Irish Marchlands]

We do not revile them. We pity them because thinking you're something you're not is obviously a sign of mental illness, and we take relevant steps to treat them. Encouraging their delusion isn't healthy.

Anyway, feel free to propose a resolution regarding transsexuals if you think there's such a need, and we can discuss it there.

Then you obviously must punish children for pretending to be super heroes and the like since they may thing they are a superhero, or a princess or anything else imaginative. After all, according to what you wrote, it is a sign of mental illness.

You are merely being contrarian here, you cannot possibly be suggesting that delusions and the fantasies and games of children are the same in order to de-legitimise the point the Ambassador of Meekinos is making.

[Meekinos]

Then you obviously must punish children for pretending to be super heroes and the like since they may thing they are a superhero, or a princess or anything else imaginative. After all, according to what you wrote, it is a sign of mental illness.

You are merely being contrarian here, you cannot possibly be suggesting that delusions and the fantasies and games of children are the same in order to de-legitimise the point the Ambassador of Meekinos is making.

One is voluntary, one isn't. The childish fantasies are the earlier. It fits the description of delusion. If someone wishes to treat one condition as a delusion, it should treat all equally.

[The Irish Marchlands]

You are merely being contrarian here, you cannot possibly be suggesting that delusions and the fantasies and games of children are the same in order to de-legitimise the point the Ambassador of Meekinos is making.

One is voluntary, one isn't. The childish fantasies are the earlier. It fits the description of delusion. If someone wishes to treat one condition as a delusion, it should treat all equally.

No they shouldn't. This is silly, farcical logic.

[Meekinos]

One is voluntary, one isn't. The childish fantasies are the earlier. It fits the description of delusion. If someone wishes to treat one condition as a delusion, it should treat all equally.

No they shouldn't. This is silly, farcical logic.

Only because we don't understand the logic that transsexualism is a delusion.

[The Irish Marchlands]

No they shouldn't. This is silly, farcical logic.

Only because we don't understand the logic that transsexualism is a delusion.

In that Case let the Ambassador from Strategion explain his Nation's standing more clearly before you go off and accuse its position as erroneous as it would be if it were directed at children.

[Strategion]

Then you obviously must punish children for pretending to be super heroes and the like since they may thing they are a superhero, or a princess or anything else imaginative. After all, according to what you wrote, it is a sign of mental illness.
...
One is voluntary, one isn't. The childish fantasies are the earlier. It fits the description of delusion. If someone wishes to treat one condition as a delusion, it should treat all equally.

We said treat, not punish.

Firstly, children do not actually believe they're superheroes. That's why they call it 'playing pretend'. Besides, if they actually believed they did have superpowers, eg that they could fly, an adult would quickly correct them and stop them before they actually attempted to jump off a building ("treating" the delusion, if that's how you want to look at it).

Next, please also note the difference between fantasy and delusion. A fantasy is simply an imagination. A delusion is a fixed false belief (or beliefs) held in contrary to evidence. These irrational beliefs defy normal reasoning and remain firm even when overwhelming proof is presented to dispute them. If a child actually believed that they had superpowers, an adult would try to convince them otherwise, but if they were simply fantasizing about having superpowers, there'd be no need to treat them.

Only because we don't understand the logic that transsexualism is a delusion.

Believing that you're a woman (or a woman trapped in the body of a man) when you're a man is a delusion. Clearly they are not genetically or biologically female. Similarly, believing that you're a parrot trapped in the body of a man is also a delusion. If someone insisted to you and really believed that they'd been born the wrong species; that they weren't human but were in fact a parrot, would you encourage them to get feather implants and live the life of a parrot? I doubt you would. I think you'd get them help because they're mentally ill.

Long story short, transsexual surgery is outlawed in Strategion (and the newest FGM resolution may possibly be construed to be wide enough to outlaw it in all WA countries anyway), so we cannot support the current resolution as it is proposed.

[Meekinos]

We said treat, not punish.

By deciding that someone is "delusional" and "treating" them, you are indeed punishing the person.

Firstly, children do not actually believe they're superheroes. That's why they call it 'playing pretend'. Besides, if they actually believed they did have superpowers, eg that they could fly, an adult would quickly correct them and stop them before they actually attempted to jump off a building ("treating" the delusion, if that's how you want to look at it).

Though some adults may humour the 'delusion' if they believe it is harmless. So then it becomes acceptance.

Next, please also note the difference between fantasy and delusion. A fantasy is simply an imagination. A delusion is a fixed false belief (or beliefs) held in contrary to evidence. These irrational beliefs defy normal reasoning and remain firm even when overwhelming proof is presented to dispute them. If a child actually believed that they had superpowers, an adult would try to convince them otherwise, but if they were simply fantasizing about having superpowers, there'd be no need to treat them.

There are many delegates who that would certainly apply to. Namely those foolishly believe in a single god (what religion was it again? You know, the one with the zombie god-like guy who came back from the dead) and deny the many gods that do exist, or even the Prophets of Profit. I can guarantee that you, ambassador, are one of them. You are likely not a polytheist who accepts the PoP. You would then say we are delusional but we have our own evidence that they have existed.

Delusion can become subjective when there is an absence of valid, accurate or, outdated evidence.

Believing that you're a woman (or a woman trapped in the body of a man) when you're a man is a delusion. Clearly they are not genetically or biologically female. Similarly, believing that you're a parrot trapped in the body of a man is also a delusion. If someone insisted to you and really believed that they'd been born the wrong species; that they weren't human but were in fact a parrot, would you encourage them to get feather implants and live the life of a parrot? I doubt you would. I think you'd get them help because they're mentally ill.

Purely subjective.

We are not versed in matters of psychology. That we would leave to the professionals to decide. Even if it seems wrong to us, we are not one to judge.

Transsexualism is perfectly normal in our nation. Our own psychological research suggests that there is the possibility that if we interfere with the natural order we are going to damage the spirit granted to the person by the gods.

Long story short, transsexual surgery is outlawed in Strategion (and the newest FGM resolution may possibly be construed to be wide enough to outlaw it in all WA countries anyway), so we cannot support the current resolution as it is proposed.

No, no it wouldn't. If it is consensual then it wouldn't outlaw it.

[Vesintor]

Firstly, I would like to thank my fellow nations for giving me so much constructive feedback, I really appreciate all the ideas and suggestions. I will get to replying and amending the resolution based on what has been posted when I return home; so I apologize if I haven't addressed your comment yet.

With Love,
The Free Land of Vesintor

[Strategion]

By deciding that someone is "delusional" and "treating" them, you are indeed punishing the person.

Treatment of people who are ill is perfectly justifiable and isn't punishment. If a child falls sick, wouldn't a parent be obliged to take it to a doctor?

Though some adults may humour the 'delusion' if they believe it is harmless. So then it becomes acceptance.

We feel that a delusion which causes people to seek to harm themselves by mutilating their bodies by undergoing invasive, medically unnecessary procedures such as cutting off their breasts or genitalia is not a harmless delusion. If Meekinos wants to humour transsexuals though, well, that's your business.

There are many delegates who that would certainly apply to. Namely those foolishly believe in a single god (what religion was it again? You know, the one with the zombie god-like guy who came back from the dead) and deny the many gods that do exist, or even the Prophets of Profit. I can guarantee that you, ambassador, are one of them. You are likely not a polytheist who accepts the PoP. You would then say we are delusional but we have our own evidence that they have existed.

Delusion can become subjective when there is an absence of valid, accurate or, outdated evidence.

I'm not sure whether you're trying to imply that I believe in "zombie gods", or that I deny the PoP? (You would be right on the latter but wrong on the former.)
Anyway, we'd classify the above delusions - if you define them as delusions - as harmless beliefs.

Transsexualism is perfectly normal in our nation. Our own psychological research suggests that there is the possibility that if we interfere with the natural order we are going to damage the spirit granted to the person by the gods.

We don't really care what people in other countries believe, whether they believe they're transsexuals or whether they believe they're parrots. Though if you were living in Strategion we'd attempt to treat you.

No, no it wouldn't. If it is consensual then it wouldn't outlaw it.

Fine, we'll concede that.

[Grays Harbor]

Are we going to have frelling legislation banning "discrimination" against any and all permutations of human, semi-human, sort-of-human, almost human, cyborg-human, alien, sexual inclination, etc, etc, etc?

This is getting out of hand.