NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Repeal "Legalizing Prostitution"

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.
User avatar
Alqania
Minister
 
Posts: 2548
Founded: Aug 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

[PASSED] Repeal "Legalizing Prostitution"

Postby Alqania » Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:10 pm

"Hello, I am Lord Raekevik, I represent the Queendom of Alqania and this is my first proposal.

Ever since Resolution #167, "Legalizing Prostitution" was passed, the Queendom has wanted to repeal it on the grounds that it is terribly written. We note with concern that a previous attempt to repeal this resolution was defeated at vote and that the other repeals that have been drafted rather than removing contentious sections have continued to include the moralistic arguments that have failed to reach the support of the majority.

Believing that this resolution will be repealed not from high horses but from a proper dissemination of the resolution, as it is flawed beyond that which is usually seen in international law, this repeal of ours is focused on the poor quality and loopholes of the resolution. We have based it on statements that we have previously made in the many debating sessions regarding "Legalizing Prostitution".

The Queendom supports the replacement drafted by Snefaldia and Mousebumples, titled "Banning Sex Trafficking".

This being said, I humbly submit this repeal to the World Assembly."


Repeal "Legalizing Prostitution"

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation

Category: Repeal

Resolution: GA#167

Proposed by: Alqania

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #167: Legalizing Prostitution (Category: Free Trade; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: THE WORLD ASSEMBLY:

APPLAUDS this resolution's intention of reducing barriers to free trade and commerce and improving the legal protection sapient beings have from abuse and disease and to further their civil rights,

REGRETS that this resolution equates the criminalization of prostitution with the criminalization of prostitutes, which may lead to incorrect assumptions with regards to the effects of criminalization,

AFFIRMS that the age, fame, infamy or notoriety of an act, practice or profession is not, and should not be, considered in itself a valid basis for determining its legal status, and is rather irrelevant in the arena of international law,

NOTES that the legalization of prostitution applies to "all member states residing with the World Assembly." This can be exploited should member states define themselves as residing within their own sovereign territory rather than territory which is under direct World Assembly sovereignty. The operative clause can in this manner be rendered completely ineffective,

WORRIES that while this resolution mandates that prostitutes be made fully aware of the "health or other specific risk (sic)" connected to prostitution, no such information is required to be made available to clients. Risks to clients may include:
  • Sexually transmitted infections,
  • Other infectious diseases, such as respiratory diseases, which may be transmitted through talking, kissing or other non-sexual contact between prostitute(s) and client(s),
  • Unwanted pregnancy and parenthood,
  • Injury, death and psychological trauma,
  • Social stigma, family and work issues,
  • Robbery and blackmail,

ACKNOWLEDGES that the "Sexual Privacy Act" outlaws non-consensual sexual acts, which would include those between prostitute(s) and client(s) as well as between any other persons. Protection from non-consensual sexual acts would remain without "Legalizing Prostitution",

SPECIFIES that the confines of previously passed international law are broad enough to allow a member state to effectively stop sapient beings from working as prostitutes in spite of the operative clauses of this resolution, rendering it completely ineffective,

REALIZES that this resolution fails to take into account the diversity of economic systems among member states and specifically fails to recognize systems in which businesses operate without profit,

QUESTIONS the resolution's assertion that brothels are beneficial to the safety of the prostitute as there is no factual basis for this statement,

CONCLUDES that "Legalizing Prostitution" is flawed to the point of being ineffective and therefore fails to achieve its goals;

HEREBY:

REPEALS Resolution #167, "Legalizing Prostitution".


The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING the intent of "Legalizing Prostitution" to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce, to improve the legal protection of sapient beings from abuse and disease and to further civil rights,

CONCERNED HOWEVER that the resolution equates the criminalization of prostitution with the criminalization of prostitutes, leading to incorrect assumptions on the effects of criminalization,

AFFIRMING that the age, fame, infamy or notoriety of an act, practice or profession is not in itself any valid basis for its legal status, but rather of no relevance to international law,

RECALLING that it is the right of each member state to regulate commerce within their jurisdiction,

NOTING that the resolution's legalization of prostitution is worded to apply to "all member states residing with the World Assembly" and that this restrictive relative clause can be exploited by member states defining themselves as residing within their own sovereign territory rather than territory under direct World Assembly sovereignty to render the operative clause completely ineffective,

CONCERNED that while the resolution mandates that prostitutes be made fully aware of the health or other specific risk connected to prostitution, no such information is required to be made available to clients,

ACKNOWLEDGING that international law independent of "Legalizing Prostitution" outlaws non-consensual sexual acts, between prostitute and client as well as between any other persons,

NOTING that the confines of previously existent international law are wide enough to allow a member state to effectively stop sapient beings from becoming prostitutes in spite of "Legalizing Prostitution", rendering that operative clause completely ineffective,

FURTHER NOTING that the resolution fails to take into account the diversity of economic systems among member states, specifically systems in which businesses operate without profit,

FINDING the resolution's assertion that brothels are beneficial to the safety of the prostitute unfounded,

CONCLUDING that "Legalizing Prostitution" is flawed to the point of being ineffective and therefore fails to achieve its goals,

HEREBY repeals Resolution #167, "Legalizing Prostitution".
Last edited by Flibbleites on Sat Jan 21, 2012 9:02 am, edited 6 times in total.
Queendom of Alqania
Amor vincit omnia et nos cedamus amori
Former Speaker of the Gay Regional Parliament
Represented in the WA by Ambassador Lord Raekevikinfo
and Deputy Ambassador Princess Christineinfo
Author of GA#178
Member of UNOG and the Stonewall Alliance

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:18 pm

Alqania wrote:Snippity-snip-snip


Dr. Forshaw, befallen with tears of ecstasy, could not speak. His aide promptly nodded in approval, and handed Dr. Forshaw a box of lemon scented tissues in order to quell his ejaculation of emotions.
Last edited by Connopolis on Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:23 pm

I'm getting tired of this. Whatever it takes, REPEAL THAT DAMN THING!

Freedom over tyranny.

Well, could you add the criminal problems too?
Last edited by The Republic of Lanos on Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Alqania
Minister
 
Posts: 2548
Founded: Aug 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Alqania » Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:39 pm

"I fixed a couple of grammatical flaws."

Connopolis wrote:
Alqania wrote:Snippity-snip-snip


Dr. Forshaw, befallen with tears of ecstasy, could not speak. His aide promptly nodded in approval, and handed Dr. Forshaw a box of lemon scented tissues in order to quell his ejaculation of emotions.


"I would like to think that Your Excellency's support is a testament to the potential of this repeal."

The Republic of Lanos wrote:I'm getting tired of this. Whatever it takes, REPEAL THAT DAMN THING!

Freedom over tyranny.

Well, could you add the criminal problems too?


"It is the assessment of the Alqanian delegation that the inclusion of such arguments would be counter-productive. We hope that the Lanosian delegation will join us in sacrificing that line of argument for the greater good of getting the resolution repealed."
Queendom of Alqania
Amor vincit omnia et nos cedamus amori
Former Speaker of the Gay Regional Parliament
Represented in the WA by Ambassador Lord Raekevikinfo
and Deputy Ambassador Princess Christineinfo
Author of GA#178
Member of UNOG and the Stonewall Alliance

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:43 pm

We don't care what the fuck is included. We support this repeal since CR's didn't go anywhere.

We support any repeal...that's how bad this is.

User avatar
Tarazah
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 53
Founded: Oct 25, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarazah » Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:00 pm

Alqania wrote:
The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING the intent of "Legalizing Prostitution" to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce, to improve the legal protection of sapient beings from abuse and disease and to further civil rights,1

CONCERNED HOWEVER that the resolution equates the criminalization of prostitution with the criminalization of prostitutes, leading to incorrect assumptions on the effects of criminalization,2

AFFIRMING that the age, fame, infamy or notoriety of an act, practice or profession is not in itself any valid basis for its legal status, but rather of no relevance to international law,3

RECALLING that it is the right of each member state to regulate commerce within their jurisdiction,4

NOTING that the resolution's legalization of prostitution is worded to apply to "all member states residing with the World Assembly" and that this restrictive relative clause can be exploited by member states defining themselves as residing within their own sovereign territory rather than territory under direct World Assembly sovereignty to render the operative clause completely ineffective,5

CONCERNED that while the resolution mandates that prostitutes be made fully aware of the health or other specific risk connected to prostitution, no such information is required to be made available to clients,6

ACKNOWLEDGING that international law independent of "Legalizing Prostitution" outlaws non-consensual sexual acts, between prostitute and client as well as between any other persons,7

NOTING that the confines of previously existent international law are wide enough to allow a member state to effectively stop sapient beings from becoming prostitutes in spite of "Legalizing Prostitution", rendering that operative clause completely ineffective,8

FURTHER NOTING that the resolution fails to take into account the diversity of economic systems among member states, specifically systems in which businesses operate without profit,9

FINDING the resolution's assertion that brothels are beneficial to the safety of the prostitute unfounded,10

CONCLUDING that "Legalizing Prostitution" is flawed to the point of being ineffective and therefore fails to achieve its goals,

HEREBY repeals Resolution #167, "Legalizing Prostitution".


1-Thank you
2-What? Confusing. Are you speaking of that "we have to legalizing prostitution, but not prostitutes" nonsense?
3-What does that have to do with anything?
4-It was passed so must not have been such a problem.
5- It's already been explained by a mod that that excuse is nonsense. Nothing is wrong with the wording.
6-Prostitutes go through sex all day, clients don't which is why I found it not needed.
7-Non-consenual is rape. It was already illegal
8-You say a very bold statement and no facts to back it
9-Without profit? I guess prostitutes won't be paying then. Just adjust it to your circumstance.
10- More people, more safety. Brothels = more people more people = more safety
Last edited by Tarazah on Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:05 pm

Great Azarath, is that you?

User avatar
Sionis Prioratus
Senator
 
Posts: 3537
Founded: Feb 07, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Sionis Prioratus » Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:14 pm

Connopolis wrote:
Alqania wrote:Snippity-snip-snip


Dr. Forshaw, befallen with tears of ecstasy, could not speak. His aide promptly nodded in approval, and handed Dr. Forshaw a box of lemon scented tissues in order to quell his ejaculation of emotions.


I wholehearted agree with said approval. I do approve as well. This is worthy.

Yours in being disturbed about Dr. Forshaw's non-stop mention of "ejaculation" over several threads, for fear of getting pregnant,
Cathérine Victoire de Saint-Clair
Haute Ambassadrice for the WA for
✡ The Jewish Kingdom of Sionis Prioratus
Daughter of The Late King Adrian the First
In the Name of
Sa Majesté Impériale Dagobert VI de Saint-Clair
A simple truth

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:19 pm

Tarazah wrote:1-Thank you
2-What? Confusing. Are you speaking of that "we have to legalizing prostitution, but not prostitutes" nonsense?
3-What does that have to do with anything?
4-It was passed so must not have been such a problem.
5- It's already been explained by a mod that that excuse is nonsense. Nothing is wrong with the wording.
6-Prostitutes go through sex all day, clients don't which is why I found it not needed.
7-Non-consenual is rape. It was already illegal
8-You say a very bold statement and no facts to back it
9-Without profit? I guess prostitutes won't be paying then. Just adjust it to your circumstance.
10- More people, more safety. Brothels = more people more people = more safety


I'll pick your argument apart in a civil manner.

People should know if they'll get an STD from somebody. In fact, you are required to notify your sexual partners if you are found to have an STD. Brothels are mostly in conditions of slavery. This resolution is a problem since it was poorly written and anyone can loophole it away. What makes things unprofitable? Anything. Even basic regulations...

I can go on and on as well as everyone else here. Even Connopolis wants a repeal and replacement with a blocker that allows nations to ban this practice. This should have never been passed in the first place. People want this gone. Why don't you support a repeal since this is such a bad resolution?

User avatar
Alqania
Minister
 
Posts: 2548
Founded: Aug 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Alqania » Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:21 pm

Tarazah wrote:
Alqania wrote:
The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING the intent of "Legalizing Prostitution" to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce, to improve the legal protection of sapient beings from abuse and disease and to further civil rights,1

CONCERNED HOWEVER that the resolution equates the criminalization of prostitution with the criminalization of prostitutes, leading to incorrect assumptions on the effects of criminalization,2

AFFIRMING that the age, fame, infamy or notoriety of an act, practice or profession is not in itself any valid basis for its legal status, but rather of no relevance to international law,3

RECALLING that it is the right of each member state to regulate commerce within their jurisdiction,4

NOTING that the resolution's legalization of prostitution is worded to apply to "all member states residing with the World Assembly" and that this restrictive relative clause can be exploited by member states defining themselves as residing within their own sovereign territory rather than territory under direct World Assembly sovereignty to render the operative clause completely ineffective,5

CONCERNED that while the resolution mandates that prostitutes be made fully aware of the health or other specific risk connected to prostitution, no such information is required to be made available to clients,6

ACKNOWLEDGING that international law independent of "Legalizing Prostitution" outlaws non-consensual sexual acts, between prostitute and client as well as between any other persons,7

NOTING that the confines of previously existent international law are wide enough to allow a member state to effectively stop sapient beings from becoming prostitutes in spite of "Legalizing Prostitution", rendering that operative clause completely ineffective,8

FURTHER NOTING that the resolution fails to take into account the diversity of economic systems among member states, specifically systems in which businesses operate without profit,9

FINDING the resolution's assertion that brothels are beneficial to the safety of the prostitute unfounded,10

CONCLUDING that "Legalizing Prostitution" is flawed to the point of being ineffective and therefore fails to achieve its goals,

HEREBY repeals Resolution #167, "Legalizing Prostitution".


1-Thank you
2-What? Confusing. Are you speaking of that "we have to legalizing prostitution, but not prostitutes" nonsense?
3-What does that have to do with anything?
4-It was passed so must not have been such a problem.
5- It's already been explained by a mod that that excuse is nonsense. Nothing is wrong with the wording.
6-Prostitutes go through sex all day, clients don't which is why I found it not needed.
7-Non-consenual is rape. It was already illegal
8-You say a very bold statement and no facts to back it
9-Without profit? I guess prostitutes won't be paying then. Just adjust it to your circumstance.
10- More people, more safety. Brothels = more people more people = more safety


"1. You are welcome
2. No, I am not. In the so-called 'Swedish model', prostitution is illegal but it is only the client that is a criminal; the prostitute is committing no crime.
3. It points out that the resolution's clause about how old and well known prostitution is has nothing to do with anything. Pointing out a resolution's flaws is relevant in a repeal.
4. Hmm, that has to do with your number 8. Perhaps I should move it and make that clearer.
5. Where? Please link to it.
6. You found it not needed. I think it is needed. And how do you know a client does not buy sex all day?
7. Exactly my point - thank you for repeating it.
8. See my response to your number 4.
9. The resolution outlaws regulations that make the business unprofitable, so a nation without profit can not adjust it to their circumstances.
10. Assuming people work together and help each other without taking advantage of each other. That would be an unfounded assumption."


Sionis Prioratus wrote:
Connopolis wrote:
Dr. Forshaw, befallen with tears of ecstasy, could not speak. His aide promptly nodded in approval, and handed Dr. Forshaw a box of lemon scented tissues in order to quell his ejaculation of emotions.


I wholehearted agree with said approval. I do approve as well. This is worthy.

Yours in being disturbed about Dr. Forshaw's non-stop mention of "ejaculation" over several threads, for fear of getting pregnant,


"I and the Queendom are deeply grateful for the support. I hope our choice of arguments will be convincing enough to get a repeal both to quorum and passed. As for the choice of words, perhaps there should be more free condoms right here at WAHQ."
Queendom of Alqania
Amor vincit omnia et nos cedamus amori
Former Speaker of the Gay Regional Parliament
Represented in the WA by Ambassador Lord Raekevikinfo
and Deputy Ambassador Princess Christineinfo
Author of GA#178
Member of UNOG and the Stonewall Alliance

User avatar
Dizyntk
Minister
 
Posts: 2699
Founded: Aug 05, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Dizyntk » Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:24 pm

"The Dizyntk Imperium will support this proposed repeal. While we have no problem with the current resolution as we can easily bypass it for reasons stated in this proposal, as well as some that are not, we would be more comfortable with being able to legalize the profession as we see fit rather than have to exploit loopholes to the same effect."

"As for worries about Dr. Forshaws ejaculations, we will be happy to offer any Ambassadors our highly effective contraceptive implants. We have them for both genders. Unfortunately we only have them for our species and humans at this time."
Dizyntk WA Ambassador Princess Feyalisa Zerleen Profile
What is a Dizyntk you ask? Dizyntk Info
Cyanka is the Dizyntk year and is equal to 18 earth months. Do your own math.

User avatar
Alqania
Minister
 
Posts: 2548
Founded: Aug 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Alqania » Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:34 pm

Dizyntk wrote:"The Dizyntk Imperium will support this proposed repeal. While we have no problem with the current resolution as we can easily bypass it for reasons stated in this proposal, as well as some that are not, we would be more comfortable with being able to legalize the profession as we see fit rather than have to exploit loopholes to the same effect."

"As for worries about Dr. Forshaws ejaculations, we will be happy to offer any Ambassadors our highly effective contraceptive implants. We have them for both genders. Unfortunately we only have them for our species and humans at this time."


"If the Grand Imperium has found more loopholes, I would be most interested to hear of them, if Your Imperial Highness would be willing and able to share. Perhaps they could lead to improvements in the repeal."
Queendom of Alqania
Amor vincit omnia et nos cedamus amori
Former Speaker of the Gay Regional Parliament
Represented in the WA by Ambassador Lord Raekevikinfo
and Deputy Ambassador Princess Christineinfo
Author of GA#178
Member of UNOG and the Stonewall Alliance

User avatar
Dizyntk
Minister
 
Posts: 2699
Founded: Aug 05, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Dizyntk » Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:43 pm

"But of course, Lord Raekevik. I would be happy to do so. Primarily they involve the ability to tax the profession as well as basic licenses for the occupation, which the current resolution does not address at all and which we may carge fees for. Nowhere in the resolution does it say we may not charge these fees. To better point these out, I have taken the liberty of translating the addition to Dizyntk law that was put in place when the GA#167 went into effect."
Deffinitions: Cyanka = Dizyntk year. 18 human months.
Valtk = 2 dollars.
Ishalt = Basically a kilometer.


Addendum#18 to Dizyntk Social Behavior Laws
Re: Selling of Sexual Contact

Part 1: No Dizyntk shall charge compensation for sexual contact unless they are properly licensed to do so by the municipal government nearest the place of their intended business. Said license shall be issued by the municipality only after the following regulations have been followed. Any and all Dizyntk offering these services must be independently licensed. No licensing shall be given for any corporate or group locations.

1. All applicants shall be at least 12 (Twelve) Cyankas of age.

2. All applicants must be Dizyntk citizens. Non-citizens will not be allowed to practice this profession in Dizyntk territory.

3. All applicants must have a felony free criminal record at time of application as well as at time of license issue.

4. All applicants must pass a STI screening performed by a qualified healer at the applicant’s expense.

5. There shall be a mandatory 3 (Three) Cyanka waiting period for said license to be issued.

6. On the date of issue, a further successful STI screening must be taken at the applicant’s expense.

7. Said license is good for 1 (One) Cyanka

8: License renewal is exempt from regulation 5, above, so long as the license holder renews the license before the expiration date and is still in possession of said license.

9. A Crown Fee of 200,000 (Two Hundred Thousand) Valtk shall be assessed upon issue and again at every renewal.

Part 2: Restrictions and Taxes on Selling Sexual Contact.

1. No selling of sexual contact is permitted within a 100 (One Hundred) Ishalt radius of a school or Temple. Any Dizyntk apprehended doing so will be subject to revocation of license as well as punishments commensurate with a class 2 misdemeanor.

2. Any Dizyntk holding a license to sell sexual contact must report for daily STI screenings, to be paid for by the license holder. Failure to report for a screening for any reason, or failure to pass said screening, shall result in immediate revocation of the license.

3. If license is revoked for the reasons outlined in Parts 2-1 and 2-2, the holder of said license may not re-apply for a new license for 3 (Three) Cyankas. Re-applications shall be subject to the same process as a new application.

4. All license holders are to keep records of all transactions carried out under the auspices of their license. These records must be presented to the nearest tax collection offices on a weekly basis.

5. The license holder shall be subject to a Crown Tax of 50 (Fifty) percent of the gross income obtained from selling of sexual contact.

6. Taxes are to be paid by the license holder on a weekly basis.

7. Failure to pay the aforementioned taxes will result in immediate revocation of the license and arrest for tax evasion.

8. Any license holder that is convicted of a felony will be subject to immediate license revocation in addition to other criminal punishments.

9. Any license holder who has lost their license for the reason of tax evasion or any other felony conviction shall be ineligible to re-apply for a license.


"Although we could be wrong, we believe that this law is well within the wording of GA#167 while making highly unlikely that you will ever find a prostitute in the Imperium."
Dizyntk WA Ambassador Princess Feyalisa Zerleen Profile
What is a Dizyntk you ask? Dizyntk Info
Cyanka is the Dizyntk year and is equal to 18 earth months. Do your own math.

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:02 pm

We still have our laws on the books banning prostitution. We just ignore it/block enforcement since we can't even regulate it according to the unprofitable clause.
Last edited by The Republic of Lanos on Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Alqania
Minister
 
Posts: 2548
Founded: Aug 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Alqania » Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:02 pm

Dizyntk wrote:"But of course, Lord Raekevik. I would be happy to do so. Primarily they involve the ability to tax the profession as well as basic licenses for the occupation, which the current resolution does not address at all and which we may carge fees for. Nowhere in the resolution does it say we may not charge these fees. To better point these out, I have taken the liberty of translating the addition to Dizyntk law that was put in place when the GA#167 went into effect."
Deffinitions: Cyanka = Dizyntk year. 18 human months.
Valtk = 2 dollars.
Ishalt = Basically a kilometer.


Addendum#18 to Dizyntk Social Behavior Laws
Re: Selling of Sexual Contact

Part 1: No Dizyntk shall charge compensation for sexual contact unless they are properly licensed to do so by the municipal government nearest the place of their intended business. Said license shall be issued by the municipality only after the following regulations have been followed. Any and all Dizyntk offering these services must be independently licensed. No licensing shall be given for any corporate or group locations.

1. All applicants shall be at least 12 (Twelve) Cyankas of age.

2. All applicants must be Dizyntk citizens. Non-citizens will not be allowed to practice this profession in Dizyntk territory.

3. All applicants must have a felony free criminal record at time of application as well as at time of license issue.

4. All applicants must pass a STI screening performed by a qualified healer at the applicant’s expense.

5. There shall be a mandatory 3 (Three) Cyanka waiting period for said license to be issued.

6. On the date of issue, a further successful STI screening must be taken at the applicant’s expense.

7. Said license is good for 1 (One) Cyanka

8: License renewal is exempt from regulation 5, above, so long as the license holder renews the license before the expiration date and is still in possession of said license.

9. A Crown Fee of 200,000 (Two Hundred Thousand) Valtk shall be assessed upon issue and again at every renewal.

Part 2: Restrictions and Taxes on Selling Sexual Contact.

1. No selling of sexual contact is permitted within a 100 (One Hundred) Ishalt radius of a school or Temple. Any Dizyntk apprehended doing so will be subject to revocation of license as well as punishments commensurate with a class 2 misdemeanor.

2. Any Dizyntk holding a license to sell sexual contact must report for daily STI screenings, to be paid for by the license holder. Failure to report for a screening for any reason, or failure to pass said screening, shall result in immediate revocation of the license.

3. If license is revoked for the reasons outlined in Parts 2-1 and 2-2, the holder of said license may not re-apply for a new license for 3 (Three) Cyankas. Re-applications shall be subject to the same process as a new application.

4. All license holders are to keep records of all transactions carried out under the auspices of their license. These records must be presented to the nearest tax collection offices on a weekly basis.

5. The license holder shall be subject to a Crown Tax of 50 (Fifty) percent of the gross income obtained from selling of sexual contact.

6. Taxes are to be paid by the license holder on a weekly basis.

7. Failure to pay the aforementioned taxes will result in immediate revocation of the license and arrest for tax evasion.

8. Any license holder that is convicted of a felony will be subject to immediate license revocation in addition to other criminal punishments.

9. Any license holder who has lost their license for the reason of tax evasion or any other felony conviction shall be ineligible to re-apply for a license.


"Although we could be wrong, we believe that this law is well within the wording of GA#167 while making highly unlikely that you will ever find a prostitute in the Imperium."


"Yes, I think the Dizyntk law is an excellent example of the ineffectiveness of the resolution. Dr Xavier asked for facts and here they are. Oh and before I forget to say so, Your Imperial Highness, I wish to make clear that the Queendom is very grateful to have the support of the Grand Imperium in this endeavour."
Queendom of Alqania
Amor vincit omnia et nos cedamus amori
Former Speaker of the Gay Regional Parliament
Represented in the WA by Ambassador Lord Raekevikinfo
and Deputy Ambassador Princess Christineinfo
Author of GA#178
Member of UNOG and the Stonewall Alliance

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:09 pm

Regardless of our previous objections, Lanos is for this, any any, repeal that will reach quorum and get rid of this resolution once and for all.

User avatar
Hirota
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5667
Founded: Jan 22, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Hirota » Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:31 am

The Republic of Lanos wrote:Great Azarath, is that you?
yup, it's him.
Image
When a wise man points at the moon the imbecile examines the finger

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Known to trigger Grammar Nazis, Spelling Nazis, Actual Nazis, the emotionally stunted, pedants and koi carp.
Those affected by the views, opinions or general demeanour of this poster should review this puppy picture. Those affected by puppy pictures should consider investing in an isolation tank.
Economic Left/Right: -3.25, Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03
Isn't it curious how people will claim they are against tribalism, then pigeonhole themselves into tribes?

User avatar
Southern Patriots
Senator
 
Posts: 4624
Founded: Apr 19, 2004
New York Times Democracy

Postby Southern Patriots » Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:23 am

The Republic of Lanos wrote:We still have our laws on the books banning prostitution. We just ignore it/block enforcement since we can't even regulate it according to the unprofitable clause.

"Really? We had no idea. It's not as if you've mentioned it 1,000 times before..."

"Anywho, I like Lord Raekevik's proposal. Strips away the petty moralism and attacks the meat of the resolution's errors."

Remember Rhodesia.

On Robert Mugabe:
Nightkill the Emperor wrote:He was a former schoolteacher.

I do hope it wasn't in economics.

Panzerjaeger wrote:Why would Cleopatra have cornrows? She is from Egypt not the goddamn Bronx.

Ceannairceach wrote:
Archnar wrote:The Russian Revolution showed a revolution could occure in a quick bloadless and painless process (Nobody was seriously injured or killed).

I doth protest in the name of the Russian Imperial family!
(WIP)

User avatar
Tarazah
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 53
Founded: Oct 25, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarazah » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:31 am

The Republic of Lanos wrote:Great Azarath, is that you?

Great Azarath is a ancient civilization, our ancestors.

User avatar
Tarazah
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 53
Founded: Oct 25, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarazah » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:33 am

The Republic of Lanos wrote:
Tarazah wrote:1-Thank you
2-What? Confusing. Are you speaking of that "we have to legalizing prostitution, but not prostitutes" nonsense?
3-What does that have to do with anything?
4-It was passed so must not have been such a problem.
5- It's already been explained by a mod that that excuse is nonsense. Nothing is wrong with the wording.
6-Prostitutes go through sex all day, clients don't which is why I found it not needed.
7-Non-consenual is rape. It was already illegal
8-You say a very bold statement and no facts to back it
9-Without profit? I guess prostitutes won't be paying then. Just adjust it to your circumstance.
10- More people, more safety. Brothels = more people more people = more safety


I'll pick your argument apart in a civil manner.

People should know if they'll get an STD from somebody. In fact, you are required to notify your sexual partners if you are found to have an STD. Brothels are mostly in conditions of slavery. This resolution is a problem since it was poorly written and anyone can loophole it away. What makes things unprofitable? Anything. Even basic regulations...

I can go on and on as well as everyone else here. Even Connopolis wants a repeal and replacement with a blocker that allows nations to ban this practice. This should have never been passed in the first place. People want this gone. Why don't you support a repeal since this is such a bad resolution?

I won't support any repeal as long as your core reason is NatSov; because then nothing will satisfy you.

User avatar
The Republic of Lanos
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17727
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Lanos » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:39 am

In this case, it is being repealed based on the faults of the resolution itself. The loopholes and such.

User avatar
Tarazah
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 53
Founded: Oct 25, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarazah » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:42 am

Alqania wrote:
Tarazah wrote:
1-Thank you
2-What? Confusing. Are you speaking of that "we have to legalizing prostitution, but not prostitutes" nonsense?
3-What does that have to do with anything?
4-It was passed so must not have been such a problem.
5- It's already been explained by a mod that that excuse is nonsense. Nothing is wrong with the wording.
6-Prostitutes go through sex all day, clients don't which is why I found it not needed.
7-Non-consenual is rape. It was already illegal
8-You say a very bold statement and no facts to back it
9-Without profit? I guess prostitutes won't be paying then. Just adjust it to your circumstance.
10- More people, more safety. Brothels = more people more people = more safety


"1. You are welcome
2. No, I am not. In the so-called 'Swedish model', prostitution is illegal but it is only the client that is a criminal; the prostitute is committing no crime.
3. It points out that the resolution's clause about how old and well known prostitution is has nothing to do with anything. Pointing out a resolution's flaws is relevant in a repeal.
4. Hmm, that has to do with your number 8. Perhaps I should move it and make that clearer.
5. Where? Please link to it.
6. You found it not needed. I think it is needed. And how do you know a client does not buy sex all day?
7. Exactly my point - thank you for repeating it.
8. See my response to your number 4.
9. The resolution outlaws regulations that make the business unprofitable, so a nation without profit can not adjust it to their circumstances.
10. Assuming people work together and help each other without taking advantage of each other. That would be an unfounded assumption."


Sionis Prioratus wrote:
I wholehearted agree with said approval. I do approve as well. This is worthy.

Yours in being disturbed about Dr. Forshaw's non-stop mention of "ejaculation" over several threads, for fear of getting pregnant,


"I and the Queendom are deeply grateful for the support. I hope our choice of arguments will be convincing enough to get a repeal both to quorum and passed. As for the choice of words, perhaps there should be more free condoms right here at WAHQ."

2- I hate that, with a passion. I think if it's gonna be illegal than both are to blame. She offered, he excepted. <===Why did she offer it in the first place?3
3- If something is world wide, well noted and both participating parties agree then obviously it helps me show Prostitution isn't that bad.
5- ....it's either in my thread or that mod's thread. I will look for it. (I think CR even explained it also)
6- If you personally think it is need than add it as your own protocol.
7- So what's your point in putting it in the repeal?
9- What happened to regulating it into your own jurisdiction?
10- When I meant safety, I spoke in terms of physical damage/i.e. Abuse. More people=more safety

User avatar
Tarazah
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 53
Founded: Oct 25, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarazah » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:43 am

Alqania wrote:
Tarazah wrote:
1-Thank you
2-What? Confusing. Are you speaking of that "we have to legalizing prostitution, but not prostitutes" nonsense?
3-What does that have to do with anything?
4-It was passed so must not have been such a problem.
5- It's already been explained by a mod that that excuse is nonsense. Nothing is wrong with the wording.
6-Prostitutes go through sex all day, clients don't which is why I found it not needed.
7-Non-consenual is rape. It was already illegal
8-You say a very bold statement and no facts to back it
9-Without profit? I guess prostitutes won't be paying then. Just adjust it to your circumstance.
10- More people, more safety. Brothels = more people more people = more safety


"1. You are welcome
2. No, I am not. In the so-called 'Swedish model', prostitution is illegal but it is only the client that is a criminal; the prostitute is committing no crime.
3. It points out that the resolution's clause about how old and well known prostitution is has nothing to do with anything. Pointing out a resolution's flaws is relevant in a repeal.
4. Hmm, that has to do with your number 8. Perhaps I should move it and make that clearer.
5. Where? Please link to it.
6. You found it not needed. I think it is needed. And how do you know a client does not buy sex all day?
7. Exactly my point - thank you for repeating it.
8. See my response to your number 4.
9. The resolution outlaws regulations that make the business unprofitable, so a nation without profit can not adjust it to their circumstances.
10. Assuming people work together and help each other without taking advantage of each other. That would be an unfounded assumption."


Sionis Prioratus wrote:
I wholehearted agree with said approval. I do approve as well. This is worthy.

Yours in being disturbed about Dr. Forshaw's non-stop mention of "ejaculation" over several threads, for fear of getting pregnant,


"I and the Queendom are deeply grateful for the support. I hope our choice of arguments will be convincing enough to get a repeal both to quorum and passed. As for the choice of words, perhaps there should be more free condoms right here at WAHQ."

2- I hate that, with a passion. I think if it's gonna be illegal than both are to blame. She offered, he excepted. <===Why did she offer it in the first place?3
3- If something is world wide, well noted and both participating parties agree then obviously it helps me show Prostitution isn't that bad.
5- ....it's either in my thread or that mod's thread. I will look for it. (I think CR even explained it also)
6- If you personally think it is need than add it as your own protocol.
7- So what's your point in putting it in the repeal?
9- What happened to regulating it into your own jurisdiction?
10- When I meant safety, I spoke in terms of physical damage/i.e. Abuse. More people=more safety

User avatar
Dizyntk
Minister
 
Posts: 2699
Founded: Aug 05, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Dizyntk » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:46 am

"There is no need to parrot yourself, Ambassador. We heard you the first time."
Last edited by Dizyntk on Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Dizyntk WA Ambassador Princess Feyalisa Zerleen Profile
What is a Dizyntk you ask? Dizyntk Info
Cyanka is the Dizyntk year and is equal to 18 earth months. Do your own math.

User avatar
Tarazah
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 53
Founded: Oct 25, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarazah » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:46 am

Hirota wrote:
The Republic of Lanos wrote:Great Azarath, is that you?
yup, it's him.
Image

You guys need to stop stalking me..... Go the other way. :arrow:

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Wendy

Advertisement

Remove ads