Wallenburg wrote:You can ask if it is legal, instead of pushing it to the submission queue immediately upon revision...
Not entirely sure what you're getting at, but I thought that's what I did. If I've broken some rule here, please explain.
Advertisement
by THX1138 » Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:59 pm
Wallenburg wrote:You can ask if it is legal, instead of pushing it to the submission queue immediately upon revision...
by Reichsstaaten von Germania » Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:29 pm
by Maowi » Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:30 pm
Reichsstaaten von Germania wrote:I agree it should be repealed, I have no power over the church and certainly cannot punish them.
by Fecaw » Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:11 pm
Even insta-repeals require some patience, but you have not broken a rule by submitting quickly.
by THX1138 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 9:20 am
by Arasi Luvasa » Mon Feb 18, 2019 9:32 am
by THX1138 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 10:35 am
Arasi Luvasa wrote:"Should the target be resubmitted without clause five, Arasi Luvasa will be against."
by Maowi » Mon Feb 18, 2019 10:40 am
THX1138 wrote:There's nothing in WA law that provides anyone a right to non-compliance. All nations are held to the same account unless otherwise indicated in law. Repealing this legislation doesn't prevent future legislation from being submitted to gain an exemption from certain laws on ideological grounds, and ideally, it would be at the discretion of the Assembly to make those decisions on a case by case basis.
OOC: There is legislation that I don't agree with idoeologically, but I still comply, and have learned to live with that over 6 years in the WA.
by THX1138 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:23 am
Maowi wrote:Under GAR#035, the Governments of member nations must ensure that all of their citizens are equal under the law. DtRoSaGM doesn't contradict this: it makes it perfectly possible for individual member nations to apply more stringent legislation in terms of discrimination within religious organisations. It just allows member nations to legislate as appropriate to them on this topic, and also allows future GA resolutions to be passed on this topic. I have said this before in this thread, and you didn't really respond in any way other than reiterating your claim that DtRoSaGM 'discriminates'.
by WA Kitty Kops » Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:18 pm
THX1138 wrote:OOC: It's about the presentation of a structurally inequitable legislation in the first place, the precedent that sets, and the potential for that precedent to be exploited in future.
NERVUN wrote:And my life flashed in front of my eyes while I did and I honestly expected my computer to explode after I entered the warning.
by Arasi Luvasa » Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:50 pm
THX1138 wrote:Arasi Luvasa wrote:"Should the target be resubmitted without clause five, Arasi Luvasa will be against."
There's nothing in WA law that provides anyone a right to non-compliance. All nations are held to the same account unless otherwise indicated in law. Repealing this legislation doesn't prevent future legislation from being submitted to gain an exemption from certain laws on ideological grounds, and ideally, it would be at the discretion of the Assembly to make those decisions on a case by case basis.
OOC: There is legislation that I don't agree with idoeologically, but I still comply and have learned to live with that over 6 years in the WA.
OOC: I genuinely feel you continue to miss the point of this repeal. What nations may or may not do isn't the issue here. It's not about the content, or how nations deal with that content. It's about the presentation of a structurally inequitable legislation in the first place, the precedent that sets, and the potential for that precedent to be exploited in future.
There's nothing in WA law that provides anyone a right to non-compliance. All nations are held to the same account unless otherwise indicated in law. Repealing this legislation doesn't prevent future legislation from being submitted to gain an exemption from certain laws on ideological grounds, and ideally, it would be at the discretion of the Assembly to make those decisions on a case by case basis.
by Maowi » Mon Feb 18, 2019 2:52 pm
WA Kitty Kops wrote:THX1138 wrote:OOC: It's about the presentation of a structurally inequitable legislation in the first place, the precedent that sets, and the potential for that precedent to be exploited in future.
OOC: If you want to write a resolution banning discriminatory practices in religious rituals, then write a resolution banning discriminatory practices in religious rituals and don't moan about a resolution not doing what it's deliberately not doing.
by Battlion » Mon Feb 18, 2019 3:05 pm
Maowi wrote:WA Kitty Kops wrote:OOC: If you want to write a resolution banning discriminatory practices in religious rituals, then write a resolution banning discriminatory practices in religious rituals and don't moan about a resolution not doing what it's deliberately not doing.
This. I purposefully allowed further legislation on the issue.
by Kenmoria » Mon Feb 18, 2019 3:08 pm
by THX1138 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 6:19 pm
Kenmoria wrote:“I will mention that your repeal’s formatting it at odds with what is normally expected. It is usual to write in clauses rather than in paragraphs, to present a clear line of reasoning without too much reading being requied. Although there is nothing wrong per se with how you are presenting your repeal, putting it more conventionally could aid it by encouraging delegations to listen to its arguements.”
by Arasi Luvasa » Mon Feb 18, 2019 8:14 pm
by THX1138 » Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:57 am
by Battlion » Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:58 am
THX1138 wrote:This repeal has been submitted.
I hope for the support of Delegates, and have a draft prepared for enhancements to GAR#035 to close the loophole on de facto exemptions through silence in future legislation. I will submit a draft for discussion in the next days.
OOC: Quite busy with work
The end goal would be that any exemptions from law that apply to groups within WA nations should be dealt with directly, and determined by the Assembly as a whole, rather than through any given legislation's silence as to whom the law applies across the spectrum of society.
by Kenmoria » Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:07 pm
THX1138 wrote:This repeal has been submitted.
I hope for the support of Delegates, and have a draft prepared for enhancements to GAR#035 to close the loophole on de facto exemptions through silence in future legislation. I will submit a draft for discussion in the next days.
OOC: Quite busy with work
The end goal would be that any exemptions from law that apply to groups within WA nations should be dealt with directly, and determined by the Assembly as a whole, rather than through any given legislation's silence as to whom the law applies across the spectrum of society.
by THX1138 » Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:48 pm
Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: You can’t ‘enhance’ legislation without repealing and then replacing it and the chances of repealing GA #035 are extremely remote, even less likely than repealing Defending the Rgiths of Sexual and Gender Minorities.)
by THX1138 » Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:56 pm
Battlion wrote:Oh god really, every single proposal for a repeal has been rejected. People are tired of this, I think you should consider whether this will go anywhere. Some legal repeals haven’t reached quorum, I don’t think this one will either.
by Maowi » Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:57 pm
THX1138 wrote:• Nations are mandated to impose rules and penalties on some organizations within their borders, while provided no strength through this law to apply those rules and penalties, equally, to others.
• Without the legal ability to hold all organizations to exactly equal account, it becomes impossible for nations to adhere to clause 2 of DRSGM, which states “…that every member nation must grant exactly the same rights, powers, permissions and services to individuals of all sexualities and genders, subject to exactly the same qualifying conditions...”.
This Assembly acknowledges the potential for these inequities under law to lead to civil unrest within nations, and to create an untenable burden on nations to both uphold DRSGM and simultaneously preserve the intended human right to civil equality under law.
by Marxist Germany » Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:47 pm
Maowi wrote:THX1138 wrote:• Nations are mandated to impose rules and penalties on some organizations within their borders, while provided no strength through this law to apply those rules and penalties, equally, to others.
• Without the legal ability to hold all organizations to exactly equal account, it becomes impossible for nations to adhere to clause 2 of DRSGM, which states “…that every member nation must grant exactly the same rights, powers, permissions and services to individuals of all sexualities and genders, subject to exactly the same qualifying conditions...”.
This Assembly acknowledges the potential for these inequities under law to lead to civil unrest within nations, and to create an untenable burden on nations to both uphold DRSGM and simultaneously preserve the intended human right to civil equality under law.
This whole chunk is incorrect. DRSGM doesn't say that religious organisations can't be punished; and if they do have to be punished in order for your nation to comply with the rest of the resolution, so be it. Silence on that topic does not mean that religious organisations are enshrined in some sort of protection.
by Maowi » Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:50 pm
Marxist Germany wrote:You didnt punish religious organisations in your resolution so i don't see why you're bringing that point up
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement