NATION

PASSWORD

Repeal of Freedom of Assembly?

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Serrland
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11968
Founded: Sep 30, 2009
Ex-Nation

Repeal of Freedom of Assembly?

Postby Serrland » Mon Dec 07, 2009 3:42 pm

Would anyone be interested in helping to craft a repeal of "Freedom of Assembly?"

Serrland has recently been troubled with protesters gathering in favour of public nudity, and unfortunately the Royal Urban Militia has been unable to stop them, due the following clause in "Freedom of Assembly:"

1.) All individuals shall have the right to peacefully assemble, associate, and protest to promote, pursue, and express any goal, cause, or view.


The protesters are peaceful, however they are "peacefully" promoting a goal that is largely taboo and considered obscene. Serrland is greatly concerned that the current Resolution does not adress obscenity in regards to assembly.

The current resolution I hope to have repealed is as follows:

Freedom of Assembly
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.


Category: Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Cookesland

Description: Nations of the World Assembly,

BELIEVING that it is an inherent right of every individual to freely associate and assemble,

APPALLED that in some nations this right is not enjoyed by all their peoples,

APPLAUDING the use of peaceful protest as a means to bring about political discussion and/or change,

DENOUNCING violence, fear, and/or terrorism as ways of bringing about these changes as a result of restriction of these freedoms,

Hereby establishes the following:

1.) All individuals shall have the right to peacefully assemble, associate, and protest to promote, pursue, and express any goal, cause, or view.

2.) No Government, Federal Authority, Corporation, or any other political or social group may take any action to infringe upon these rights; unless the individuals organizing are trespassing on private property and/or if circumstances beyond the control of the Government threaten the safety of those organizing.

3.) These things having been ordained, states that Freedom of Assembly cannot be extended towards any call for: violence, rioting, and/or actions that would cause harm to innocent people.
Last edited by Serrland on Mon Dec 07, 2009 3:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18574
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grays Harbor » Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:16 pm

We have one question, why do you believe this requires a repeal? If you are having difficulties with protesters in your own nation, why saddle the remainder of the WA with your own domestic problems?
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4386
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Father Knows Best State

Postby A mean old man » Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:31 pm

EDIT:

I don't think the WA would go for this.
Last edited by A mean old man on Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia ← please forget

User avatar
Serrland
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11968
Founded: Sep 30, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Serrland » Mon Dec 07, 2009 5:00 pm

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the spirit of this resolution. I just think a repeal/re-write could produce a better worded and defined resolution.

I realize now I ought not have used an example, I did so to illustrate an issue that arises from the wording.

User avatar
Burninati0n
Envoy
 
Posts: 278
Founded: Oct 15, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Burninati0n » Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:29 pm

No. Absolutely not. Especially not on the grounds of 'obscenity.' That is a completely subjective thing. If you were to resubmit that proposal with a clause in there about exceptions for obscene promotions, the whole thing would be a farce.

User avatar
Tanaara
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1179
Founded: Feb 27, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Tanaara » Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:54 pm

"No, I can not and will not support this, this...obscenity! If you are going to have freedom of assembly then you have to allow even assembly you may not agree with as long as they follow the rules for legal assembly. Thats the whole point behind freedom of speech as well - either all speech is free ( as long as it is legal ) or it's not - you can't cherry pick just because 'you' don't agree"

"Besides others here are quite correct - obscene varies by indiviudual, and from nation to nation. In the Domination public nudity is legal. I've have heard of societies that consider this obscene!" The UnDelegate shakes his head in complete disbelief. "The human body as "obscene", totally floors me" He mutters to himself.

User avatar
Philimbesi
Minister
 
Posts: 2453
Founded: Jun 07, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Philimbesi » Mon Dec 07, 2009 8:37 pm

Ah... no.
The Unified States Of Philimbesi
The Honorable Josiah Bartlett - President

Ideological Bulwark #235

User avatar
Hirota
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7527
Founded: Jan 22, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Hirota » Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:01 am

"Maybe you should try letting it all hang out. It's pretty liberating - although this Leather seat was a poor choice of purchase.

Would someone mind turning up the heating? "
When a wise man points at the moon the imbecile examines the finger - Confucius
Known to trigger Grammar Nazis, Spelling Nazis, Actual Nazis, the emotionally stunted and pedants.
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?

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
I use obviously in italics to emphasise the conveying of sarcasm. If I've put excessive obviously's into a post that means I'm being sarcastic

User avatar
Misoko
Attaché
 
Posts: 83
Founded: Sep 28, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Misoko » Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:29 pm

Serrland wrote:Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the spirit of this resolution. I just think a repeal/re-write could produce a better worded and defined resolution.

I realize now I ought not have used an example, I did so to illustrate an issue that arises from the wording.
So you need help with drafting a new Freedom of Assembly Act that does not allow for the freedom of assembly?

You can't have it both ways. You've said so yourself that they're being peaceful. However, you can't give your people the right to protest freely and then take it away if you don't like what you see. And you certainly can't - well, you shouldn't - have us spend our time drafting a new, more restrictive Freedom of Assembly Act to deal with a problem that is not at all considered widespread in the WA.

You can, I believe, make a new resolution that restricts public nudity. I don't know how well other nations will go for it, but you will have more success than with this.
Last edited by Misoko on Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ambassador General Jolias Uler
The Free Land of Misoko

User avatar
Tipsonia
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 47
Founded: Dec 09, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tipsonia » Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:46 pm

Domestic issues have no place in the assembly. The Confederacy inacted its own repeal of freedom of assembly laws, but doesnt support a resolution forcing all member states to do the same

User avatar
Felice beato
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Dec 10, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Felice beato » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:43 pm

Why does this concern anyone outside of your own country? We don't need to know about your problems of speech. Furthermore you can eliminate their right to do so if you wish just prepare for a revolution.

User avatar
Bears Armed
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21479
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Fri Dec 11, 2009 2:57 am

Tipsonia wrote:Domestic issues have no place in the assembly. The Confederacy inacted its own repeal of freedom of assembly laws, but doesnt support a resolution forcing all member states to do the same

OOC: Repealing the existing 'Freedom of Assembly' resolution would not result in "forcing all member states" to repeal their own laws on the subject, it would simply mean that they were no longer required to have such laws... as they currently are, and so as your own nation -- if it is a member -- is obliged to do.
The Confrederated Clans (and other Confrederated Bodys) of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Population = just under 20 million. Economy = only Thriving. Average Life expectancy = c.60 years. If the nation is classified as 'Anarchy' there still is a [strictly limited] national government... and those aren't "biker gangs", they're traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies', generally respected rather than feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152, 1474, 1521.

User avatar
Pulcifer
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 22
Founded: Dec 02, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Pulcifer » Sat Dec 12, 2009 11:21 am

Georg Colling, Pulciferian Delegate, was highly troubled by this draft. He oftened enjoyed his smoking break while floating nude in the Barry Fountain in the WA plaza. They were already going after one of his vices, he would not let them take a second. So long as his Class II diplomatic immunity held, Georg would fight with his last breath to assemble with his fellow pariahs, letting the nicotine residue float on the afternnon breeze while the cooling jets of water soothed his troubled nether regions.
Gerald de Fren
WA Viceregal Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Court of Saint Guinefort
The Imperial Dominion of Pulcifer
The Imperium

User avatar
Aven Dale
Secretary
 
Posts: 31
Founded: Mar 26, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Aven Dale » Sat Dec 12, 2009 7:31 pm

Just a heads up, taking away freedoms generally results in violence, thus once the violence is quelled, either the people will slump into a state of fear or they move to more drastic messures, or terrorism.

Sorry, i don't support this.

User avatar
Malikov
Minister
 
Posts: 2793
Founded: May 10, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Malikov » Sat Dec 12, 2009 11:19 pm

Just leave the WA if ou have a problem with it.
Current flag request.
The Official Factbook Of The United Peoples Of Malikov
Official Malkovian Flag
Official Malikovian Seal
Regional Map Of The United Peoples
Defcon:1 2 3 4 [5]
Military: .5% Standing Military|1.5% Reserves
Organizations:The Phoenix Conglomeration
The Trews - Highway of Heroes

In Flanders Fields the poppies grow
Between the crosses row on row
That mark our place, and in the sky
The larks still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below...

R.I.P.
The Conglomerate
Tiurabo wrote:Your forces are weak because you are capable of reigning them in.
"Friendship is two pals munching on a well cooked face together."

User avatar
Serrland
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11968
Founded: Sep 30, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Serrland » Sat Dec 12, 2009 11:27 pm

Absolutely. I will definitely leave the WA.

Come now. Did I say I have a problem with the freedom to assemble? Serrland is just concerned that the current resolution has no stance on obscenity in regards to assembly. Perhaps as Grays Harbour said, it ought be left as a domestic matter.

User avatar
Ausztralia
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 63
Founded: Nov 30, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Ausztralia » Sun Dec 13, 2009 8:41 am

Tanaara wrote:Thats the whole point behind freedom of speech as well - either all speech is free ( as long as it is legal ) or it's not - you can't cherry pick just because 'you' don't agree".


So, all speech is free, as long as it's legal? So that means that most speech is free but others not so...
I get what your saying (no hate or violence inducing speech etc) but you cant say that all speech must be free or none at all beause that couldn't be done.
My Embassy Thread
Currently at DEFCON: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Standing Army: 1,000,000
Reserves: 50,000

Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18574
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grays Harbor » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:20 am

Malikov wrote:Just leave the WA if ou have a problem with it.


Tired and boring. The "leave the WA if you don't like it" argument went out of fashion long ago. The sheep-lemming vote has been so overdone.

Perhaps if you do not care for debate on the issues, and nations holding a viewpoint contrary to yours, you should heed your own advise and save yourself from having to read dissenting opinions.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4386
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Father Knows Best State

Postby A mean old man » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:24 am

Serrland wrote:Absolutely. I will definitely leave the WA.


Uh oh.

Once someone says those words, the thread is immediately reduced to a massive string of spam where other WA ambassadors begin ruthlessly and violently looting and destroying the resigning ambassador's office. Might not want to start that yet.

...although, if this is going to be the case...

...then the printer's mine.

*hovers over printer waiting for other ambassador's resignation*


Just a totally OOC note: Even though the WA is pretty wacked, if you resign, then the game winds up getting pretty boring.
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia ← please forget

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4386
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Father Knows Best State

Postby A mean old man » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:29 am

Now to get back on topic...

From a national standpoint, I'd support this repeal, as I don't like my citizens assembling anywhere other than in the factories, but from an OOC standpoint I'd have to say that the original resolution is pretty legitimate. Considering the vast majority of the WA is a pile of civil-rights obsessed hippies who don't understand economics (looks like I'm still in "Advancement of Industry" mode), I don't think that this resolution is going to be repealed.
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia ← please forget

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18574
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grays Harbor » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:46 am

A mean old man wrote:Now to get back on topic...

From a national standpoint, I'd support this repeal, as I don't like my citizens assembling anywhere other than in the factories, but from an OOC standpoint I'd have to say that the original resolution is pretty legitimate. Considering the vast majority of the WA is a pile of civil-rights obsessed hippies who don't understand economics (looks like I'm still in "Advancement of Industry" mode), I don't think that this resolution is going to be repealed.


Murray the Ambassadorial Assistant sent a private note to the Ambassador from AMOM;

Please, have mercy. You nearly caused Lord Brikkel to choke on his croissant as he read that and started laughing. It seems that he agrees with your assessment, however.
Last edited by Grays Harbor on Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:28 am

In my opinion repealing the Repeal of Freedom of Assembly without a good replacement is against the true intentions of the WA. Honoured ambassador to Serrland, From the resolution concerned, you could try interpreting nudity as an action that would cause harm to innocent people.

But again, I do not want the WA to go the authoritarian route.

User avatar
Serrland
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11968
Founded: Sep 30, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Serrland » Sun Dec 13, 2009 1:40 pm

It appears the former ambassador to the WA lost his temper. He has since been sacked.

The new ambassador quite embarrassedly hangs his head and mutters.

"Whoops, the "Repeal of Freedom of Assembly" was supposed to be an internal memo. Let's pretend it never happened, alright?"

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sun Dec 13, 2009 1:48 pm

Serrland wrote:It appears the former ambassador to the WA lost his temper. He has since been sacked.

The new ambassador quite embarrassedly hangs his head and mutters.

"Whoops, the "Repeal of Freedom of Assembly" was supposed to be an internal memo. Let's pretend it never happened, alright?"

I forgive all those involved, honoured ambassador. In my opinion, there is no need to fire ambassadors for every mistake made.

Yours etc,

User avatar
Serrland
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11968
Founded: Sep 30, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Serrland » Sun Dec 13, 2009 1:53 pm

Oh, the ambassador was not fired for this transgression, rather a scandalous affair involving a secretary, milk maid, and a bison...

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads