[DEFEATED] Repeal Defending Rights Sexual Gender Minorities

[Gudmund]

These arguments are not those used in this repeal, and so they are not the topic of this thread. A different repeal being drafted right now does use those arguments (although the thread's been inactive for a few days) and my response to your points are on that thread. But this is not something to discuss here.

I consider it bad faith to vote for a repeal whose arguments don't make sense, just because you don't like the target. Write your own repeal using better arguments if you really want to get rid of the resolution.

I believe the arguments are entirely valid to this repeal, providing critique and a different opinion on the subject. While you may believe it to be in bad faith, in the current context I think it's entirely justified and appropriate. Nonetheless I appreciate your response, I probably should just put up a draft myself and see how it goes.

[The Feylands]

If one does not recognize concepts like "sexuality" I suppose this act is rather ignorable in any case.

[Kenmoria]

If one does not recognize concepts like "sexuality" I suppose this act is rather ignorable in any case.

(OOC: You can’t just refuse to acknowledge concepts fundamental to resolutions. Unless everyone in your nation is asexual and has no gender, you must be affected by DRSGM.)

[The New Nordic Union]

If one does not recognize concepts like "sexuality" I suppose this act is rather ignorable in any case.

(OOC: You can’t just refuse to acknowledge concepts fundamental to resolutions. Unless everyone in your nation is asexual and has no gender, you must be affected by DRSGM.)

(OOC: They are called the Feylands, so that is not completely unlikely.)

[Umpus]

The delegate for Umpus seems to have had a bit too much fizzy pop and could probably benefit from a banana sandwich and a nap.

the fuck Is that supposed to mean?

[The Feylands]

""Sex" and "sexuality" are social constructs born out of certain religious traditions. Intimacy does exist as does the need for it. But intimacy is always fluctuating and cannot be defined or categorized into little boxes.

Thus - the Feylands will view all matters relating to "sexuality" as a post-Christian/post-Moslem cultural matter that does not concern us."

[Araraukar]

Please avoid making entire posts out of colored text. It's just garish can be make your post difficult to read in either the regular or dark forum themes. Please note the "Garish Posts" rule in the OSRS.

OOC: Actually, I have a Voice of Mod TG that says otherwise. As long as the text isn't eyewatering, it's not garish.

[Kenmoria]

""Sex" and "sexuality" are social constructs born out of certain religious traditions. Intimacy does exist as does the need for it. But intimacy is always fluctuating and cannot be defined or categorized into little boxes.

Thus - the Feylands will view all matters relating to "sexuality" as a post-Christian/post-Moslem cultural matter that does not concern us."

“In that case, I suppose you are not bound by the target resolution, since you would already be in compliance. With no genders nor sexualities, Defending the Rights of Sexual and Gender Minorities has already been fulfilled.

This does frustrate a potential repeal argument that may come up in the future, of this not being suited to certain culture. If a nation has genders, there shouldn’t be a problem with following this resolution. If it does not, then it will be unaffected anyway.”

[Marxist Germany]

"This is one of the biggest landslides Marxist Germany has witnessed since it joined the WA, I am shocke..."
Ambassador falls out of his chair unconscious

[Maowi]

"This is one of the biggest landslides Marxist Germany has witnessed since it joined the WA, I am shocke..."
Ambassador falls out of his chair unconscious

"It even rivals the mass vote against "Restricting Solitary Confinement..."

[Umpus]

Oh. My. God. WE LITERALLY SCARED THEM OFF!

About as much as you scared of a dragon by waving a gasoline-drenched stick at it. I was posting elsewhere, and need to go to bed soon.

OOC:
Uh-huh, and you genuinely expect me to take that kind of absurdity seriously? If you need some extra peacekeeping to ensure basic human rights are upheld, then you needed the cops in the first place. Borrow some from your allies. Borrow some from Member-States.



Either way on what, LGBT Rights? Here's a quick test to find out which side you stand on: Do you support discriminating against LGBT people? Pick one. If yes, say it, and stop hiding behind the church. If no, stop making excuses for people who do.

So where does Arasi-Luvasa get this peacekeeping force? I never mentioned anything about needing an extra force, merely that an agreement was met where the public agreed to not revolt so long as religious institutions are allowed to maintain their culture and values. No peace-keeping force has been needed. The religious convictions of the revolters is both the reason they will start a civil war and the reason that they are otherwise law abiding citizens.

I believe LGBT and religious institutions should have rights, LGBT have civil rights but I do not believe that they should be allowed to enforce that other institutions abandon their values to appease them. You agree to be a member of the church and take on it's values, the same as if you agree to a contract for the same. If you don't want to be a be beholden to that value system, find another church or denomination.

Again I believe that both should be allowed to exist and allowed to practice what they believe. Neither should be forced to make demands of the other unless the one chooses to become involved. The values are as much part of the churches service as the religious ceremonies.

also,you need to accept that the WA doesn't give a flying fuck if your nation collapses,and for the 94772737th time REVOLUTIONS CAN NOT HAPPEN IN THIS GAME.

[The Feylands]

“My point is this: What is ”sex”? What is ”sexuality”? What is “LGBT”? There are no objective, definitive answers to these questions - thankfully so - as we are dealing with matters of inter-sentient interaction. I may never have felt any desire of a certain form of intimate behaviour with another - again.. matter of definitions.. woman - yet I believe that different intimate desires can appear in different sentient entities depending on a variety of factors that - again - cannot be easily seen together. We’re talking about a complex weave of sentient emotion, psychology, biochemistry - among other things - subjects few are actually competent enough to judge.

It is thusly our view that “sex” and “sexuality” are simply social constructs that grossly simplify and seriously misrepresent the natural but complex need for intimacy, one born in a certain context in which certain religions had previously sought to define certain inter-sentient interactions and phenomenons in that way. I thus recommend the WA to stay as far away from the subject as possible. Trying to arrange sentient emotion into little square boxes is simply unnatural and has never worked in practice. The WA ought to be self critical of its own norms and way of thinking.”

-Lamanda

[Sarnadia]

Vote NO!!!!!!

[Celestic Anima]

Everyone calm down, I want to say something regarding the matter.

(I suggest that you finish reading what I say. Please do not attack me.)

The reason that someone suggests repealing this legislation is because it self-contradicts by allowing organizations to discriminate the minorities, breaking Clause 2. They are not trying to repeal it because they don' want to protect the minorities.

However...... a dilemma arises from this issue.

If we don't repeal the legislation, we have a loophole in it. That's not good, as it, well, allows certain organizations to break it.\

If we repeal it, then we will give potential aggressive individuals and organizations an open window to attack the minorities during the period that we are coming up with an updated legislation, effectively doing what we don't want to do by doing what we wish to do.

Either way, nothing ends well. Especially for the minorities.

Do we have a third solution, like, just editing the legislation without removing it or something? I don' know, but I suggest that everyone consider this.

[Wrapper]

Do we have a third solution, like, just editing the legislation without removing it or something? I don' know, but I suggest that everyone consider this.

Once again, as has been stated several times, resolutions cannot be amended. The only option is to repeal and replace.

[Battlion]

"Repeal "defending the rights of sexual and gender minorities"" was defeated 11,740 votes to 4,088.

[Galway-Dublin]

Emerson downs his ready-made rusty nail. "Darling, what a large ratio, see you friends at the next vote for this thing's repeal."

[Kenmoria]

Emerson downs his ready-made rusty nail. "Darling, what a large ratio, see you friends at the next vote for this thing's repeal."

“This is the first that has gotten to vote, I believe, and was defeated by so great a majority that hopefully some delagations will give up on a repeal. Of course, there will always be discontent, but maybe now that will resurface later rather than the flurry of drafts we have been seeing recently.”

About as much as you scared of a dragon by waving a gasoline-drenched stick at it. I was posting elsewhere, and need to go to bed soon.



So where does Arasi-Luvasa get this peacekeeping force? I never mentioned anything about needing an extra force, merely that an agreement was met where the public agreed to not revolt so long as religious institutions are allowed to maintain their culture and values. No peace-keeping force has been needed. The religious convictions of the revolters is both the reason they will start a civil war and the reason that they are otherwise law abiding citizens.

I believe LGBT and religious institutions should have rights, LGBT have civil rights but I do not believe that they should be allowed to enforce that other institutions abandon their values to appease them. You agree to be a member of the church and take on it's values, the same as if you agree to a contract for the same. If you don't want to be a be beholden to that value system, find another church or denomination.

Again I believe that both should be allowed to exist and allowed to practice what they believe. Neither should be forced to make demands of the other unless the one chooses to become involved. The values are as much part of the churches service as the religious ceremonies.

also,you need to accept that the WA doesn't give a flying fuck if your nation collapses,and for the 94772737th time REVOLUTIONS CAN NOT HAPPEN IN THIS GAME.

(OOC: Arasi Luvasa made a reasonable point about the existence of potential discontent following the target resolution’s repeal. Issues and GA roleplaying are separate, so an ambassador could be worried of a revolution happening. This would occur not by the daily issues, but instead through roleplaying.)

[Greater Germany]

I was about to say "Against" but it's already been defeated.