[DRAFT] Repeal Permit Male Circumcision.

[Xanthal]

Not to be a wet blanket, but if the "goal of this repeal is not to ban male circumcision for all WA nations, but to allow each WA nation to make their own choice in regards to its availability and access within their borders," and you're changing your argument against GAR#141 to "this legislation is so vague that it leaves the issue of male circumcision in a state of legal limbo," I'm forced to question why we're taking up a perfectly good conference room when you very clearly don't have a buffet.

[Bananaistan]

OOC: I've marked this illegal on account of the believing clause which makes against "forcing WA nations to allow unnecessary medical procedures ...". The target in it's OBLIGES clause explicitly sets out the right of nations to regulate the practice of circumcision. This right to regulate the practice would allow nations to prohibit medically unnecessary circumcisions if they wish. In fact, the right to regulate would allow nations to effectively completely prohibit circumcisions through extremely onerous regulations if they so wish.

Just so I understand correctly, this legislation sets out to permit male circumcision but at the same time allows it to be regulated out of existence?

That obigles clause, in my humble opinion, is left rather ambiguous. If that is the case I shall reword my legislation as such, that this legislation is so vague that it leaves the issue of male circumcision in a state of legal limbo.

I appreciate your insight into the matter, and will make the necessary corrections.

OOC: LD nails it here:

OOC: The present resolution does allow one to regulate it out of existence as desired, just so long as it is still technically legal.

[Lord Dominator]

"I firmly believe in bringing one's own food if a buffet is not provided ambassador. Failing that, shaking down gnomes and aides for their lunches always seems to work wonders."