[CLOSED] Repeal GA #179 Clean Prostitute Act

[Alsace and Lorraine United]

[list=][/list]Repeal GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act”


Affirming that the attempt to return the ability to legislate on prostitution back to the nations is a noble one.

Expecting that by allowing member nations to regulate the prostitution industry, the world wide incarceration rate of non-violent offenders will decrease as some nations decriminalize prostitution. Decreasing spending in turn and lifting the burden off of the taxpaying citizens.

Considering that nations within the World Assembly share diverse cultures and practices. Thus, by allowing member nations to regulate prostitution, cultural and religious practices are protected rather than infringed upon whether it be for or against prostitution.

Deeply concerned that the WA regulating in any one way will always find conflict with certain nations traditions and laws, whether that be religious institutions or laws in nations that completely out law sexual intercourse in all forms.

Observing that while not completely invalidating GA #179, the contradiction made by the bill makes it unnecessary. As the bill concerns itself with taking regulation power on the topic away from the WA, but later providing a way that the WA could further regulate.


Hereby,

Repeals GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act” and thus returning legislative powers back to the member nations wholly

Repeal GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act”

Acknowledging that the attempt to return the ability to legislate on prostitution back to the nations is a noble one.

Observing that the original documents endeavor to allow nations to legislate on prostitution will allow free trade to flourish in nations of which choose to allow it while still allowing nations who find it morally reprehensible to enact legislation upon it.

Observing that the last clause of GA 179 contradicts the efforts made by the rest of the act and provides a means by which the freedom of this trade may be stunted by the WA, while the rest of the document calls to distance the WA from the issue.

Noting that by allowing the nations to legislate on prostitution without restrictions by the WA, economic benefits as well as cultural benefits can be achieved rather than one or the other based on the choice whether to or not to ban prostitution.

Hereby,

Repeals GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act” and thus returning legislative powers back to the member nations wholly.

[Kenmoria]

"Place a comma after “Hereby”. You also don't have very many reasons for a repeal."

[Alsace and Lorraine United]

"Place a comma after “Hereby”. You also don't have very many reasons for a repeal."

the reason being that the only point of the original document was to return the legislating power to nations but it then strips it from them at the end and fixed

[Imperium Anglorum]

If this is your entire proposal, it's one of those actual NatSov repeals that people keep saying will plague the Assembly. And I don't think it'll be supported at large. Saying nations should have the power isn't an argument. An argument would justify why nations should have the power and why the WA regulations are bad.

Repeal GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act”

Acknowledging that the attempt to return the ability to legislate on prostitution back to the nations is a noble one.

Observing that the last clause of GA 179 contradicts the efforts made by the rest of the act.

Hereby,

Repeals GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act” and thus returning legislative powers back to the member nations wholly.

[Alsace and Lorraine United]

If this is your entire proposal, it's one of those actual NatSov repeals that people keep saying will plague the Assembly. And I don't think it'll be supported at large. Saying nations should have the power isn't an argument. An argument would justify why nations should have the power and why the WA regulations are bad.

Repeal GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act”

Acknowledging that the attempt to return the ability to legislate on prostitution back to the nations is a noble one.

Observing that the last clause of GA 179 contradicts the efforts made by the rest of the act.

Hereby,

Repeals GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act” and thus returning legislative powers back to the member nations wholly.

Did you read the original document, the point of the repeal is to accomplish what the document says it is supposed to accomplish but than fails to follow through on

[Imperium Anglorum]

Your proposal says that the target claims NatSov principles but infringes on them at the end. And you want to repeal it for having provisions which intrude on national sovereignty. Your argument is utterly disconnected from the implicit ethical claim that this matter should be dealt with at the national level and that nations should be free to make legislation on the matter. You should justify why nations should ethically be able to do those things. The lack of an internal link, to me, prevents these assertions from being weighed and provides no justification for their truth. Arguments include three things: a claim, a warrant, and an impact. This statement lacks the latter two. On balance, it is not an argument.

[Alsace and Lorraine United]

Your proposal says that the target claims NatSov principles but infringes on them at the end. And you want to repeal it for having provisions which intrude on national sovereignty. Your argument is utterly disconnected from the implicit ethical claim that this matter should be dealt with at the national level and that nations should be free to make legislation on the matter. You should justify why nations should ethically be able to do those things. The lack of an internal link, to me, prevents these assertions from being weighed and provides no justification for their truth. Arguments include three things: a claim, a warrant, and an impact. This statement lacks the latter two. On balance, it is not an argument.

Edited

[Kenmoria]

"In the observing clause, I would explain my reasoning more closely. Most nation's delegations won't have a copy of the resolution to hand and won't know how it does this or contradicts itself."

[Sierra Lyricalia]

Observing that the last clause of GA 179 contradicts the efforts made by the rest of the act and provides a means by which the freedom of this trade may be stunted by the WA, while the rest of the document calls to distance the WA from the issue.

"Yes, requiring health screenings of workers who have a high risk of being iinfected by, and transmitting infections to, their clients and domestic partners, sure is a huge restriction on basic freedoms."

Noting that by allowing the nations to legislate on prostitution without restrictions by the WA, economic benefits as well as cultural benefits can be achieved rather than one or the other based on the choice whether to or not to ban prostitution.

"What benefits are those, Ambassador? I can't think of any 'benefits' that aren't outweighed by the increased public health risk; and the burden placed on states in which sex work is legal is so very minimal here. Basically no different from requiring radiation monitoring of workers who are in proximity to nuclear materials and power systems, which for some reason the WA hasn't seen fit to do. This repeal is a solution in search of a problem. Opposed."

OOC: As alluded to by others, this draft is currently illegal as a NatSov-only repeal (that is, literally the only argument you've made is that 'Hey, nations should be in charge of this instead of the WA!'). If you want this to be legal as well as have any hope of passing, you'll need to come up with actual reasons why the current law serves member nations badly, doesn't accomplish its own goals, or has terrible side-effects that can only be countered by repealing and possibly replacing the law.

Good luck!

[Alsace and Lorraine United]

Observing that the last clause of GA 179 contradicts the efforts made by the rest of the act and provides a means by which the freedom of this trade may be stunted by the WA, while the rest of the document calls to distance the WA from the issue.

"Yes, requiring health screenings of workers who have a high risk of being iinfected by, and transmitting infections to, their clients and domestic partners, sure is a huge restriction on basic freedoms."

Noting that by allowing the nations to legislate on prostitution without restrictions by the WA, economic benefits as well as cultural benefits can be achieved rather than one or the other based on the choice whether to or not to ban prostitution.

"What benefits are those, Ambassador? I can't think of any 'benefits' that aren't outweighed by the increased public health risk; and the burden placed on states in which sex work is legal is so very minimal here. Basically no different from requiring radiation monitoring of workers who are in proximity to nuclear materials and power systems, which for some reason the WA hasn't seen fit to do. This repeal is a solution in search of a problem. Opposed."

OOC: As alluded to by others, this draft is currently illegal as a NatSov-only repeal (that is, literally the only argument you've made is that 'Hey, nations should be in charge of this instead of the WA!'). If you want this to be legal as well as have any hope of passing, you'll need to come up with actual reasons why the current law serves member nations badly, doesn't accomplish its own goals, or has terrible side-effects that can only be countered by repealing and possibly replacing the law.

Good luck!

It isn’t that health screenings are bad it is only that the whole point of the original document was to deregulate the industry but in turn ended up placing more restrictions also I will do my best to better elaborate

[Kenmoria]

"I would not put such a big gap before the Hereby line."

[Alsace and Lorraine United]

Repeal GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act”


Affirming that the attempt to return the ability to legislate on prostitution back to the nations is a noble one.

Expecting that by allowing member nations to regulate the prostitution industry, the world wide incarceration rate of non-violent offenders will decrease as some nations decriminalize prostitution. Decreasing spending in turn and lifting the burden off of the taxpaying citizens.

Considering that nations within the World Assembly share diverse cultures and practices. Thus, by allowing member nations to regulate prostitution, cultural and religious practices are protected rather than infringed upon whether it be for or against prostitution.

Deeply concerned that the WA regulating in any one way will always find conflict with certain nations traditions and laws, whether that be religious institutions or laws in nations that completely out law sexual intercourse in all forms.

Observing that while not completely invalidating GA #179, the contradiction made by the bill makes it unnecessary. As the bill concerns itself with taking regulation power on the topic away from the WA, but later providing a way that the WA could further regulate.

Hereby,

Repeals GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act” and thus returning legislative powers back to the member nations wholly

Repeal GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act”

Acknowledging that the attempt to return the ability to legislate on prostitution back to the nations is a noble one.

Observing that the original documents endeavor to allow nations to legislate on prostitution will allow free trade to flourish in nations of which choose to allow it while still allowing nations who find it morally reprehensible to enact legislation upon it.

Observing that the last clause of GA 179 contradicts the efforts made by the rest of the act and provides a means by which the freedom of this trade may be stunted by the WA, while the rest of the document calls to distance the WA from the issue.

Noting that by allowing the nations to legislate on prostitution without restrictions by the WA, economic benefits as well as cultural benefits can be achieved rather than one or the other based on the choice whether to or not to ban prostitution.

Hereby,

Repeals GA #179 “Clean Prostitute Act” and thus returning legislative powers back to the member nations wholly.

[Desmosthenes and Burke]

We really do not see the author's point. We see no contradiction in the prior resolution, nor do we agree that its purpose was in any way deregulatory. We see absolutely no issues in the prior resolution that we would want resolved, and thus no reason to repeal it. Would the proponent of the repeal care to elaborate on what they would replace "The Clean Prostitute Act" with and explain why it is preferable to a resolution that retains power to the member states of the WA?

[Alsace and Lorraine United]

We really do not see the author's point. We see no contradiction in the prior resolution, nor do we agree that its purpose was in any way deregulatory. We see absolutely no issues in the prior resolution that we would want resolved, and thus no reason to repeal it. Would the proponent of the repeal care to elaborate on what they would replace "The Clean Prostitute Act" with and explain why it is preferable to a resolution that retains power to the member states of the WA?

Fair points all around however there would be no replacement in the wa, it would be left solely to the nations

[Kenmoria]

"I must ask if the author intends to submit a repeal. I would strongly recommend that there is one drafted, as leaving it to the member nation seems rather foolish for such a controversial and potentially dangerous business. One cannot trust WA countries to apply the appropriate amount of regulation for this."

[Alsace and Lorraine United]

"I must ask if the author intends to submit a repeal. I would strongly recommend that there is one drafted, as leaving it to the member nation seems rather foolish for such a controversial and potentially dangerous business. One cannot trust WA countries to apply the appropriate amount of regulation for this."

This proposal is being abandoned