NationStates

Araraukar wrote:

La Navasse wrote:11. Assigns the World Assembly Scientific Programme the duties of overlooking cloning for biomedical research and use to ensure their accordance with this resolution and the promotion of the sharing of cloning technology.

OOC: How does that stop non-sapient things hurting sapient things? A dog biting a man, for example.

OOC: Any way the WASP sees fit.

La Navasse wrote:

Araraukar wrote:OOC: How does that stop non-sapient things hurting sapient things? A dog biting a man, for example.

OOC: Any way the WASP sees fit.

OOC: Not good enough. You as the proposal author should be setting the restrictions, rather than giving a committee absolute power over everything. Also, you're totally missing the point: there is no way to "child-proof" everything non-sapient that's alive.

EDIT: In addition to which, WASP isn't really the committee you want to use for any kind of enforcement of that sort.

Araraukar wrote:

La Navasse wrote:OOC: Any way the WASP sees fit.

OOC: Not good enough. You as the proposal author should be setting the restrictions, rather than giving a committee absolute power over everything. Also, you're totally missing the point: there is no way to "child-proof" everything non-sapient that's alive.

EDIT: In addition to which, WASP isn't really the committee you want to use for any kind of enforcement of that sort.

However, I don't exactly want a committee that isn't flexible and barges in on nations that don't want such enforcement - that's why nations can run WASP and decide how they are going to manage issues of cloning.

Also, how has the following clause not child-proofed everything non-sapient that's alive?

8. Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient provided that they are not created for the express intent to cause harm to sapient organisms;

Except nations don't run WASP. It can't be different for every country to handle on their own.

La Navasse wrote:8. Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient provided that they are not created for the express intent to cause harm to sapient organisms;

OOC: You do realize that that would exclude cloning of guard/police dogs? (EDIT: Yes, yes, I know such dogs are more a deterrent, but the deterrent only works because of their intent to cause harm if you don't obey the commands given.) 2nd EDIT: And probably anything (are viruses organisms? that's still debated in RL) created for medically therapeutic intentions, where some harm (also depends on how you define "harm") to the individual is generally intended. Hell, leeches (yes, they're still used, often to improve circulation in attaching/re-attaching extremities like fingers or toes) bite you and suck blood from you. Maggots (wound treatment) literally eat bits of you (which is generally considered a harm, even though they're usually removed before they can go for the healthy tissue).

Araraukar wrote:

La Navasse wrote:8. Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient provided that they are not created for the express intent to cause harm to sapient organisms;

OOC: You do realize that that would exclude cloning of guard/police dogs? (EDIT: Yes, yes, I know such dogs are more a deterrent, but the deterrent only works because of their intent to cause harm if you don't obey the commands given.)

Eh. I think cloning should be for peaceful purposes.

OOC: Reposting this here so you don't miss it, if reading only new replies:

And probably [prohibits the cloning of] anything (are viruses organisms? that's still debated in RL) created for medically therapeutic intentions, where some harm (also depends on how you define "harm") to the individual is generally intended. Hell, leeches (yes, they're still used, often to improve circulation in attaching/re-attaching extremities like fingers or toes) bite you and suck blood from you. Maggots (wound treatment) literally eat bits of you (which is generally considered a harm, even though they're usually removed before they can go for the healthy tissue).

La Navasse wrote:Eh. I think cloning should be for peaceful purposes.

Also, that's a great attitude and one that I share, but the peaceful purposes include medical purposes.

Araraukar wrote:OOC: Reposting this here so you don't miss it, if reading only new replies:

And probably [prohibits the cloning of] anything (are viruses organisms? that's still debated in RL) created for medically therapeutic intentions, where some harm (also depends on how you define "harm") to the individual is generally intended. Hell, leeches (yes, they're still used, often to improve circulation in attaching/re-attaching extremities like fingers or toes) bite you and suck blood from you. Maggots (wound treatment) literally eat bits of you (which is generally considered a harm, even though they're usually removed before they can go for the healthy tissue).

La Navasse wrote:Eh. I think cloning should be for peaceful purposes.

Also, that's a great attitude and one that I share, but the peaceful purposes include medical purposes.

I think it could it argued that as on the whole, they provide benefit, there is no harm.

I plan on submitting this draft soon if there are no other contraindications.

“I don’t see the need to include the World Assembly Scientific Programme in clause 11, as the proposal works fine without its inclusion and I am generally opposed to employing committees just for the sake of it.”

OOC post.

La Navasse wrote:Defines a clone that is genetically altered not to great extent as a clone as defined in this resolution;

Why?

La Navasse wrote:Excludes, for the purposes of this resolution, any artificially produced but genetically identical or genetically altered copy of any originator that can asexually reproduce for the intentions of having offspring, the naturally reproduced descendant of an originator, due to an inability to realistically naturally reproduce asexually or sexually, from being defined as a clone, and defines them as offspring instead;

...what? Does this apply to non-sapient organisms too?

La Navasse wrote:Grants all clones the same rights as their originator’s species, regardless of any disabilities resulting from a failed cloning;

So, in the case of animals, none. And in the case of sapients, none until the time they would be born (the abortion resolutions).

La Navasse wrote:Restricts all cloning to only be done by qualified biomedical personnel, or qualified veterinary personnel in collaboration with qualified biomedical personnel;

Qualified, how? I would say "being able to do it" would count as qualification. Cloning isn't exactly easy, if assuming RL-esque tech level.

La Navasse wrote:Restricts the cloning of sapient organisms only to originators who fully consent to being cloned;

...so one parent who's unable to breed (to satisfy the offspring clause) anymore, wants to have a clone baby of their dead only child, but the other parent (half the child's genome is from them) refuses, then no baby? Are are all instances of "cloning" meant only for "clones" as defined by the proposal? Because you can obviously clone individuals for the offspring reasons. You only define the noun, not the verb.

La Navasse wrote:Permits the cloning of unconscious, unfeeling organisms from sapient originators, where the clones themselves do not have any sapience and have been proven to not be in locked-in syndrome, for biomedical experimentation and use;

Fetuses by definition are not sapient (being aware of the separation of "self" from "others" is part of the definition of sapiency; human babies don't reach that until well after birth), nor, up to a certain point of development, individuals, and definitely not individuals in the eyes of the WA until they're born (or are cut off from life-support and are viable to live on without it).

La Navasse wrote:Bans the cloning of conscious, feeling organisms from sapient originators for biomedical experimentation and use, and of any cloning of any sapient originator if the medical professionals who clone cannot reliably confirm, with a high degree of confidence, that the clone is not suffering from locked-in syndrome or any related disability;

Such disabilities aren't, at least in RL humans, found until after the individual is born. Also, does this ban affect the offspring clause earlier? Because you use the word "clone" here, and that by your definition does not include offspring.

La Navasse wrote:Reserves for all sapient clones the right to know the origin of their genetic material at their national legal age of consent unless the clonal parent requests otherwise;

...so wait, given that you're excluding offspring clones from being included in the word "clone", are you trying to make it okay to clone people (sapients) to become guinea-pigs? How the fuck do you think that'd pass CoCR?

La Navasse wrote:Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient provided that they are not created for the express intent to cause harm to sapient organisms;

And if they cause harm anyway?

La Navasse wrote:Reserves for all WA member-states the right to legislate on the legal methods of cloning as laid out by this resolution and on anything regarding organ cloning;

...if the WA legislates on the cloning, as you do in this resolution, you're taking that right out of the hands of the member states. I think you probably meant to have only the organ cloning here, though I would point out that there are resolutions in existence that concern the matter, so you'd be trying to amend them by giving nations the right to legislate on anything on the matter.

Araraukar wrote:

La Navasse wrote:Grants all clones the same rights as their originator’s species, regardless of any disabilities resulting from a failed cloning;

So, in the case of animals, none. And in the case of sapients, none until the time they would be born (the abortion resolutions).

"Actually, ambassador, funny story about that; all animals are covered by some level of protection, and some even allowed to vote, in our nation.
In fact, even plants and other life forms are covered by some of our laws. Isn't that right, Leafy?" A small plant sits quietly on the desk and doesn't seem to reply.

OOC: Idk, I was looking through resolutions, saw that, and felt the need to make a silly but truthful comment.

“Your preamble seems at odds with the legislation in your active clauses. The main issues your mandates tackle are: providing a set of ethical principles guiding behaviour towards clones, and addressing what is moral to clone in the first place. Yet, nothing about those two issues is mentioned in the preamble. In fact, you don’t actually mention any problems caused by the current lack of legislation, beyond a general need for ‘precautions’.”

Jutsa wrote:"Actually, ambassador, funny story about that; all animals are covered by some level of protection, and some even allowed to vote, in our nation.
In fact, even plants and other life forms are covered by some of our laws. Isn't that right, Leafy?" A small plant sits quietly on the desk and doesn't seem to reply.

OOC: Idk, I was looking through resolutions, saw that, and felt the need to make a silly but truthful comment.

OOC: Don't tempt me to go into full RP mode with PPU. And also, you were replying to an OOC post.

What protections do cloned animals have? Like, can you point out the exact resolutions?

Jutsa wrote:

What protections do cloned animals have? Like, can you point out the exact resolutions?

WA resolutions? Not really, sorry; not too familiar with the existing laws yet. Still kinda going through resolutions while I update them over on NSI.
I mean, I know at least a few times there were animal rights resolutions passed, but they kept getting repealed for various reasons I didn't look too into.
Pretty sure there isn't one specifically addressing the topic atm, because of that.

Sorta like universal jurisdiction: just doesn't have much luck despite the several attempts. *shrugs*

OOC: No need to spoiler it when it's entirely relevant to the topic at hand. You replied in IC to me OOCly saying that there aren't any WA-mandated protections on animals. No animal rights resolution. Your IC comment to that seemed to imply there was. If we agree there isn't, then La Navasse referring to "the same rights as their originator’s species" in clause 3 is nonsense for non-sapient organisms.

In general I think the author should decide what they're really aiming for here.

1. Sapient clone rights? All sapients are covered by existing resolutions already. People already can't be used as guinea-pigs without their permission.

2. Sapient clone health? Then they need to re-focus it and stop demanding perfection, since nothing is perfect when we're talking about complex organisms.

3. The ethics of cloning? Then they need to refocus it and go for the limits of ethics; like not letting clones of sapients that have been intentionally made ill to reach the developmental point where they would, if they were produced via normal reproduction, come under the WA's child protection resolutions.

4. Using cloned organisms as bioweapons of some kind? Actual bioweapons (viruses and such) have already been banned, using more complex organisms as weapons has already been banned, and there's really no sensible reason I can see to ban the cloning of something like, say, police dogs, nevermind their potential as "weapons". It needs much better arguments for it, if that's the goal.

La Navasse wrote:

---

The Cloning Conventions
Category: Health | Area of Effect: Bioethics | Proposed by: La Navasse

---

Disturbed by the lack of legislation concerning biological clones;

Aware that many nations with biological engineering have the ability to clone organisms;

In awe of the vast potential biological clones have to improve the society & livelihood of their respective nations;

Resolute in the belief that certain precautions must be exercised in regards to biological cloning;

The World Assembly hereby:

1. Defines a clone for any organism as a genetically identical, artificially produced copy of a single individual, the originator;
   
   
   1. Defines a clone that is genetically altered not to great extent as a clone as defined in this resolution;
   
   
2. Excludes, for the purposes of this resolution, any artificially produced but genetically identical or genetically altered copy of any originator that can asexually reproduce for the intentions of having offspring, the naturally reproduced descendant of an originator, due to an inability to realistically naturally reproduce asexually or sexually, from being defined as a clone, and defines them as offspring instead;
   
   
3. Grants all clones the same rights as their originator’s species, regardless of any disabilities resulting from a failed cloning;
   
   
4. Restricts all cloning to only be done by qualified biomedical personnel, or qualified veterinary personnel in collaboration with qualified biomedical personnel;
   
   
   1. Restricts the cloning of sapient organisms only to originators who fully consent to being cloned;
   
   
5. Permits the cloning of unconscious, unfeeling organisms from sapient originators, where the clones themselves do not have any sapience and have been proven to not be in locked-in syndrome, for biomedical experimentation and use;
   
   
6. Bans the cloning of conscious, feeling organisms from sapient originators for biomedical experimentation and use, and of any cloning of any sapient originator if the medical professionals who clone cannot reliably confirm, with a high degree of confidence, that the clone is not suffering from locked-in syndrome or any related disability;
   
   
7. Reserves for all sapient clones the right to know the origin of their genetic material at their national legal age of consent unless the clonal parent requests otherwise;
   
   
8. Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient provided that they are not created for the express intent to cause harm to sapient organisms;
   
   
9. Authorizes and actively encourages nations to share cloning technology;
   
   
10. Reserves for all WA member-states the right to legislate on the legal methods of cloning as laid out by this resolution and on anything regarding organ cloning;
    
    
11. Assigns the World Assembly Scientific Programme the duties of overlooking cloning for biomedical research and use to ensure their accordance with this resolution and the promotion of the sharing of cloning technology.

---

The Cloning Conventions
Category: Health | Area of Effect: Bioethics | Proposed by: La Navasse

---

Disturbed by the lack of legislation concerning biological clones;

Aware that many nations with biological engineering have the ability to clone organisms;

In awe of the vast potential biological clones have to improve the society & livelihood of their respective nations;

Resolute in the belief that certain precautions must be exercised in regards to biological cloning;

The World Assembly hereby:

1. Defines a clone for any organism as a genetically identical or a genetically altered, artificially produced copy of a single naturally born individual, the originator;
   
   
   1. Defines organ cloning as artificially creating a genetically identical or a genetically altered organ from an originator’s genetic information;
   
   
2. Excludes, for the purposes of this resolution, any artificially produced but genetically identical or genetically altered copy of any originator that can asexually reproduce for the intentions of having offspring, the naturally reproduced descendant of an originator, due to an inability to realistically naturally reproduce asexually or sexually, from being defined as a clone, and defines them as an offspring instead;
   
   
3. Grants all clones the same rights as their originator’s species, regardless of any disabilities resulting from a failed cloning;
   
   
4. Restricts all cloning to only be done by qualified biomedical personnel, or qualified veterinary personnel in collaboration with qualified biomedical personnel;
   
   
   1. Restricts the cloning of sapient organisms only to originators who fully consent to being cloned;
   
   
5. Permits the cloning of unconscious, unfeeling organisms from sapient originators, where the clones themselves do not have any sapience and have been proven to not be in locked-in syndrome, for biomedical experimentation and use;
   
   
6. Bans the cloning of conscious, feeling organisms from sapient originators for biomedical experimentation and use, and of any cloning of any sapient originator if the medical professionals who clone cannot reliably confirm, with a high degree of confidence, that the clone is not suffering from locked-in syndrome or any related disability;
   
   
7. Reserves for all sapient clones the right to know the origin of their genetic material at their national legal age of consent unless the clonal parent requests otherwise;
   
   
8. Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient provided that they do not cause harm to sapient organisms;
   
   
9. Authorizes and actively encourages nations to share cloning technology;
   
   
10. Reserves for all WA member-states the right to legislate on the legal methods of cloning as laid out by this resolution and on anything regarding organ cloning;
    
    
11. Assigns the World Assembly Scientific Programme the duties of overlooking cloning for biomedical research and use to ensure their accordance with this resolution and the promotion of the sharing of cloning technology.

---

The Cloning Conventions
Category: Health | Area of Effect: Bioethics | Proposed by: La Navasse

---

The General Assembly,

Defines a clone for any organism as a genetically identical or a genetically altered, artificially produced copy of a single naturally born individual, the originator;

Defines organ cloning as artificially creating a genetically identical or a genetically altered organ from an originator’s genetic information;

Excludes, for the purposes of this resolution, any artificially produced but genetically identical or genetically altered copy of any originator that can asexually reproduce for the intentions of having offspring, the naturally reproduced descendant of an originator, due to an inability to realistically naturally reproduce asexually or sexually, from being defined as a clone, and defines them as an offspring instead;

Grants all clones the same rights as their originator’s species, regardless of any disabilities resulting from a failed cloning;

Restricts all cloning to only be done by qualified biomedical personnel, or qualified veterinary personnel in collaboration with qualified biomedical personnel;

Restricts the cloning of sapient organisms only to originators who fully consent to being cloned;

Permits the cloning of unconscious, unfeeling organisms from sapient originators, where the clones themselves do not have any sapience and have been proven to not be in locked-in syndrome, for biomedical experimentation and use;

Bans the cloning of conscious, feeling organisms from sapient originators for biomedical experimentation and use, and of any cloning of any sapient originator if the medical professionals who clone cannot reliably confirm, with a high degree of confidence, that the clone is not suffering from locked-in syndrome or any related disability;

Reserves for all sapient clones the right to know the origin of their genetic material at their national legal age of consent;

Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient;

Authorizes and actively encourages nations to share cloning technology;

Reserves for all WA member-states the right to legislate on the legal methods of cloning as laid out by this resolution and on anything regarding organ cloning;

Assigns to the World Assembly Scientific Programme the duties of overlooking cloning for biomedical research and use to ensure their accordance with this resolution and the promotion of the sharing of cloning technology.

This is simply the third, unchanged final draft from the previously failed proposal, which can be seen here. I plan to further develop this draft with the criticism received previously. Additional constructive criticism for this version is welcome.

Cloning should be banned excepting in research proposes

OOC
You know about the well-established [in RL] method of propagating various cultivated plants from 'cuttings''? Technically speaking, those are clones...

Blueflarst wrote:

La Navasse wrote:

---

The Cloning Conventions
Category: Health | Area of Effect: Bioethics | Proposed by: La Navasse

---

Disturbed by the lack of legislation concerning biological clones;

Aware that many nations with biological engineering have the ability to clone organisms;

In awe of the vast potential biological clones have to improve the society & livelihood of their respective nations;

Resolute in the belief that certain precautions must be exercised in regards to biological cloning;

The World Assembly hereby:

1. Defines a clone for any organism as a genetically identical, artificially produced copy of a single individual, the originator;
   
   
   1. Defines a clone that is genetically altered not to great extent as a clone as defined in this resolution;
   
   
2. Excludes, for the purposes of this resolution, any artificially produced but genetically identical or genetically altered copy of any originator that can asexually reproduce for the intentions of having offspring, the naturally reproduced descendant of an originator, due to an inability to realistically naturally reproduce asexually or sexually, from being defined as a clone, and defines them as offspring instead;
   
   
3. Grants all clones the same rights as their originator’s species, regardless of any disabilities resulting from a failed cloning;
   
   
4. Restricts all cloning to only be done by qualified biomedical personnel, or qualified veterinary personnel in collaboration with qualified biomedical personnel;
   
   
   1. Restricts the cloning of sapient organisms only to originators who fully consent to being cloned;
   
   
5. Permits the cloning of unconscious, unfeeling organisms from sapient originators, where the clones themselves do not have any sapience and have been proven to not be in locked-in syndrome, for biomedical experimentation and use;
   
   
6. Bans the cloning of conscious, feeling organisms from sapient originators for biomedical experimentation and use, and of any cloning of any sapient originator if the medical professionals who clone cannot reliably confirm, with a high degree of confidence, that the clone is not suffering from locked-in syndrome or any related disability;
   
   
7. Reserves for all sapient clones the right to know the origin of their genetic material at their national legal age of consent unless the clonal parent requests otherwise;
   
   
8. Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient provided that they are not created for the express intent to cause harm to sapient organisms;
   
   
9. Authorizes and actively encourages nations to share cloning technology;
   
   
10. Reserves for all WA member-states the right to legislate on the legal methods of cloning as laid out by this resolution and on anything regarding organ cloning;
    
    
11. Assigns the World Assembly Scientific Programme the duties of overlooking cloning for biomedical research and use to ensure their accordance with this resolution and the promotion of the sharing of cloning technology.

---

The Cloning Conventions
Category: Health | Area of Effect: Bioethics | Proposed by: La Navasse

---

Disturbed by the lack of legislation concerning biological clones;

Aware that many nations with biological engineering have the ability to clone organisms;

In awe of the vast potential biological clones have to improve the society & livelihood of their respective nations;

Resolute in the belief that certain precautions must be exercised in regards to biological cloning;

The World Assembly hereby:

1. Defines a clone for any organism as a genetically identical or a genetically altered, artificially produced copy of a single naturally born individual, the originator;
   
   
   1. Defines organ cloning as artificially creating a genetically identical or a genetically altered organ from an originator’s genetic information;
   
   
2. Excludes, for the purposes of this resolution, any artificially produced but genetically identical or genetically altered copy of any originator that can asexually reproduce for the intentions of having offspring, the naturally reproduced descendant of an originator, due to an inability to realistically naturally reproduce asexually or sexually, from being defined as a clone, and defines them as an offspring instead;
   
   
3. Grants all clones the same rights as their originator’s species, regardless of any disabilities resulting from a failed cloning;
   
   
4. Restricts all cloning to only be done by qualified biomedical personnel, or qualified veterinary personnel in collaboration with qualified biomedical personnel;
   
   
   1. Restricts the cloning of sapient organisms only to originators who fully consent to being cloned;
   
   
5. Permits the cloning of unconscious, unfeeling organisms from sapient originators, where the clones themselves do not have any sapience and have been proven to not be in locked-in syndrome, for biomedical experimentation and use;
   
   
6. Bans the cloning of conscious, feeling organisms from sapient originators for biomedical experimentation and use, and of any cloning of any sapient originator if the medical professionals who clone cannot reliably confirm, with a high degree of confidence, that the clone is not suffering from locked-in syndrome or any related disability;
   
   
7. Reserves for all sapient clones the right to know the origin of their genetic material at their national legal age of consent unless the clonal parent requests otherwise;
   
   
8. Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient provided that they do not cause harm to sapient organisms;
   
   
9. Authorizes and actively encourages nations to share cloning technology;
   
   
10. Reserves for all WA member-states the right to legislate on the legal methods of cloning as laid out by this resolution and on anything regarding organ cloning;
    
    
11. Assigns the World Assembly Scientific Programme the duties of overlooking cloning for biomedical research and use to ensure their accordance with this resolution and the promotion of the sharing of cloning technology.

---

The Cloning Conventions
Category: Health | Area of Effect: Bioethics | Proposed by: La Navasse

---

The General Assembly,

Defines a clone for any organism as a genetically identical or a genetically altered, artificially produced copy of a single naturally born individual, the originator;

Defines organ cloning as artificially creating a genetically identical or a genetically altered organ from an originator’s genetic information;

Excludes, for the purposes of this resolution, any artificially produced but genetically identical or genetically altered copy of any originator that can asexually reproduce for the intentions of having offspring, the naturally reproduced descendant of an originator, due to an inability to realistically naturally reproduce asexually or sexually, from being defined as a clone, and defines them as an offspring instead;

Grants all clones the same rights as their originator’s species, regardless of any disabilities resulting from a failed cloning;

Restricts all cloning to only be done by qualified biomedical personnel, or qualified veterinary personnel in collaboration with qualified biomedical personnel;

Restricts the cloning of sapient organisms only to originators who fully consent to being cloned;

Permits the cloning of unconscious, unfeeling organisms from sapient originators, where the clones themselves do not have any sapience and have been proven to not be in locked-in syndrome, for biomedical experimentation and use;

Bans the cloning of conscious, feeling organisms from sapient originators for biomedical experimentation and use, and of any cloning of any sapient originator if the medical professionals who clone cannot reliably confirm, with a high degree of confidence, that the clone is not suffering from locked-in syndrome or any related disability;

Reserves for all sapient clones the right to know the origin of their genetic material at their national legal age of consent;

Allows the cloning of any organism that is not sapient;

Authorizes and actively encourages nations to share cloning technology;

Reserves for all WA member-states the right to legislate on the legal methods of cloning as laid out by this resolution and on anything regarding organ cloning;

Assigns to the World Assembly Scientific Programme the duties of overlooking cloning for biomedical research and use to ensure their accordance with this resolution and the promotion of the sharing of cloning technology.

This is simply the third, unchanged final draft from the previously failed proposal, which can be seen here. I plan to further develop this draft with the criticism received previously. Additional constructive criticism for this version is welcome.

Cloning should be banned excepting in research proposes

Why?

“I’m unable to fully understand the idea of clauses 1 and 1a. You appear to have two separate definitions for a ‘clone’, one of which is rather recursive. If 1a is merely meant to elaborate on 1, then I see no reason to have it as a separate subclause, likewise, if it is supposed to clear up an ambiguity, either make the original definition less ambiguos or have it as a separate, clarifying clause.”

Falcania wrote:

Blueflarst wrote:Cloning should be banned excepting in research proposes

Why?

Imagine clones killing people and occuping his lifes such distopia has to be avoided

Blueflarst wrote:

Falcania wrote:
Why?

Imagine clones killing people and occuping his lifes such distopia has to be avoided

"That isnt how cloning works, ambassador."

OOC: @Araraukar: Ah, found one. It doesn't protect all animals, but it protects sapient life forms*.

#355, which funnily enough is the number of the issue with wood-eating spikeballs.

Against

Jutsa wrote:OOC: @Araraukar: Ah, found one. It doesn't protect all animals, but it protects sapient life forms*.

OOC: Only after they've been born. And the animals not having rights (not being allowed to extinct a harmless species isn't a right in the sense the proposal means it) was my point.

From here on out, I will be authoring this proposal as Cassett (Caspian Settlement), and permanently retiring the Lanav (La Navasse) name. I will also address all criticisms and suggestions shortly.