[RESUMED] Repeal: “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy”

[Youssath]

Given the confusion of the referral of the drafts, I have decided to place the most relevant draft in the front post.

Acknowledging that Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy legalizes affordable hormone therapy to transgender individuals,

Understanding that the Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy aims to resolve the distress of gender dysphoria,

Alarmed at the resolution's lack of clarity on affordable hormone therapy on all consenting individuals, including those medically unfit or ineligible to receive it,

Worried that the resolution fails to tackle any misinformation that transgenders are signing up for, and its long-term implications and side effects,

Regretting that the resolution fails to cover that hormone therapy is simply a temporary measure, and that continued hormone therapy is required for transgenders similar to that of medication,

Further regretting that the resolution does not address nations with different religious practices or values,

Noting that the resolution failed to recognize the consequences of hormone therapy to a transgender minor, and that it can negatively impact the child's puberty and developmental stages should he/she chooses not to follow through his/her hormone therapy course,

Further noting that the resolution fails to address transgenders living in poor infrastructural zones, and that specialized medical services such as hormonal therapy may be unavailable to them,

Calling for a more articulate and well-thought out resolution to better clarify and serve transgenders with gender dysphoria.

General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy” (Category: Civil Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

In accordance to the World Health Organization, while the definition accepts that gender variant behaviour and preferences alone cannot form the basis of diagnosis for those under this group, it does not exclude its treatment in correlation to other sexual health disorders or issues.

Calling on General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy” Clause 2 and 4, which states that distresses experienced from gender dysphoria is explicitly stated to be a mental condition (Clause 4), contrary to the fact that their experiences is explicitly stated not to be a product of "mental illness," "confusion," "disease", or anything of the sort (Clause 2), GA #467 contradicts itself in its definition of the medical nature of transgender and gender non-binary people, and that it only creates confusion for it to be passed in the General Assembly as an international definition.

Concerned that the implementation of this bill will impede on the democratic elements of the General Assembly as it fails to recognize the cultural upbringings and differences of various WA member states, most particularly of Islamic theocratic, conservative and nationalist nations. The repealing of GA #467 is best recommended to first ensure a united consensus among all types of WA member states, not just for liberal and democratic nations. Failure to foresee this shall undermine every democratic element that the World Assembly rests upon.

Supporting the concept of "self-determination" and ex injuria jus non-oritur, the matter of transgender hormone therapy is not the subject of debate in international affairs if it violates the constitutional law of the state. Therefore, it shall rest on the authority of the state to govern as she pleases on the subject of "hormone therapy".

Emphasizing on the economic costs of such a resolution, the affordability of transgender hormone therapy will be directed towards the wrong audience, who will see this as a choice and not a medical treatment as GA #467 expressly requires the legalization of affordable, easy-to-access hormone therapy for all consenting individuals. Such a deluded conclusion based on government subsidised treatment will lead to excessive consumption and wastage of medical resources and services, both of which could be directed into more meaningful projects such as bioresearch. It will also be fiscally irresponsible for any WA member states to allow the continuation of government-subsidized treatment as not all WA member states are able to effectively cover its costs and that GA #467 does not effectively address this problem. As such, the recommendation to repeal GA #467 remains justified based on an economic perspective.

Youssath is in full support of the recent proposal made by Royal Bulgaria and encourages all WA member states to actively repeal General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy” to encourage a more fair and just World Assembly accepting of all WA members in its diversity.

link to proposal: https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1563317676

[Araraukar]

OOC: As submitted:

In response to the recently legislated resolution "Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy" some points as to why this resolution should be immediately repealed are presented to the World Assembly member-nations:

I. It demands that all World Assembly member-nations have as written:" easy-to-access way for its transgender population to access hormone therapy" without any regard of the financial state some World Assembly members may be in. In order for the nations to carry into effect this resolution, they must set aside from their national fund or increase taxes on their citizens so that the required facilities are built, the requested medications are bought and professionals in this sphere are recruited, trained or sent for specialization. These actions will, in no doubt, prove very costly to some nations.

II. The proposed as fact №3 statement: "Their first-hand accounts of this understanding are real; each person is in the best position to understand and discern their own gender identity." cannot be accepted as one as there are many cases of people with autism, schizophrenia or dissociative identity disorder (which are undeniably classified as mental illnesses), who under the impact of their illness identify themselves as a member of the opposite sex or something in-between and demand that their bodies be altered . The proposed and accepted resolution will force medical persons to perform a hormone therapy on patients, who have not made this choice of their own sanity. And the fact alone that they identify themselves as transgender people will be enough to tie the hands of both medical specialists and jurists because of this resolution, which so formulated, allows it.

III. This resolution does not take into account the various cultures, religions and scientific development of all the World Assembly member-nations. It demands that all nations recognize transgender people as sain or existing, which may contradict their official religion, to which
98% of the populace may belong. Furthermore enforcing the legislation of such a resolution can be seen as a threat to the national sovereignty of certain nations as it will also force governments to change the laws, which govern such cases. This may result in protests and riots from citizens, who feel betrayed because the government they have democratically chosen, accepts laws controversial to the ideals it was chosen to represent and defend.

IV. The required laws cannot be enforced if the judiciary of a certain state deems them unconstitutional, thus making the legislation of this resolution both impractical and impossible without violating the law of a certain nation.

Broken into parts for feedback:

without any regard of the financial state some World Assembly members may be in

Which goes for the vast majority of resolutions.

they must set aside from their national fund or increase taxes on their citizens so that the required facilities are built

Outright lying means Honest Mistake, funny as it sounds. The target does not require any building of facilities. Like, I can't even imagine where you pulled this one out of. Also, no taxes were mentioned, and the WA literally cannot directly affect member nations' tax policies to begin with, because of NEF.

the requested medications are bought and professionals in this sphere are recruited, trained or sent for specialization

Again, what the fuck are you talking about? It only requires hormones to be affordable to the individual, it doesn't require the nation to buy them. Also, again, what "professionals in this sphere"? You should already have endocrinologists (people specialized in hormones) just for your normal healthcare needs, as well as pharmacists (people specialized in handing out/selling the medications), again for your normal healthcare needs. Estrogen exists in simple pill form and testosterone in a salve you spread on the skin and let it be absorbed from there. Both are ways of taking the medication that the individual can do themselves.

The proposed as fact №3 statement:

You have broken code there. The submission form doesn't understand macros.

"Their first-hand accounts of this understanding are real; each person is in the best position to understand and discern their own gender identity." cannot be accepted as one as there are many cases of people with autism, schizophrenia or dissociative identity disorder (which are undeniably classified as mental illnesses)

Whether you want to accept it or not, the target proposal does not assert that, it's simply repeating it to be in compliance with a previous resolution. So trying to use your inability to deal with facts as a reason, runs into the problem of there now being TWO resolutions that say it's not a mental illness and cannot be classified as such.

Also, autism is a developmental disorder, not mental illness. Dissociate identity disorder and schizophrenia are, but have literally nothing to do with gender dysphoria or being transgender. It's like complaining that chickens are proof that apples don't exist.

who under the impact of their illness identify themselves as a member of the opposite sex or something in-between

Transgender people can have the abovementioned issues, just like cisgender people can. They are not related conditions, and trying to claim they are, is frankly speaking insulting to everyone, including yourself (for framing yourself to appear completely ignorant of what the words you used, mean).

and demand that their bodies be altered

This has nothing to do with the target resolution, nor do all transgender people demand or even want that.

will force medical persons to perform a hormone therapy on patients

Again, target resolution doesn't force anyone to do anything, simply that the treatment is available and affordable. And as I already said, the hormones exist in self-administrable form in RL, so it's not that difficult to imagine they do so in imaginary worlds as well.

who have not made this choice of their own sanity

This, frankly speaking, just makes you look stupid. Do you know what dissociation means? Your "facts" reek of it.

And the fact alone that they identify themselves as transgender people will be enough to tie the hands of both medical specialists and jurists because of this resolution, which so formulated, allows it.

...this literally makes no sense as a sentence. What are you trying to say?

This resolution does not take into account the various cultures, religions and scientific development of all the World Assembly member-nations. It demands that all nations recognize transgender people as sain or existing, which may contradict their official religion, to which
98% of the populace may belong.

Neither do any of the other human rights resolutions. Slavery is still banned even if your society had totally depended on it. Maltreatment of prisoners of war is still forbidden, even if your cultural practice had been to torture them. Human sacrifice is still banned, even if it had been the central tenet of your state religion.

Also, you have a random enter press there.

Furthermore enforcing the legislation of such a resolution can be seen as a threat to the national sovereignty

Duh. That's what WA does. Nobody's forcing the nations to remain in the WA.

This may result in protests and riots from citizens, who feel betrayed because the government they have democratically chosen, accepts laws controversial to the ideals it was chosen to represent and defend.

This has nothing to do with the target resolution, and what I said about human rights resolutions still applies. Tell me, how did your people cope with resolution CoCR?

The required laws cannot be enforced if the judiciary of a certain state deems them unconstitutional, thus making the legislation of this resolution both impractical and impossible without violating the law of a certain nation.

Again, duh, that's what WA does. If your national law conflicts with WA resolutions, your national law is ignored until you have changed it to agree with the resolutions. This is a fight you cannot win, because of how the WA works.

All in all your proposal can be broken down into Honest Mistake and NatSov, which both make it illegal.

[East Meranopirus]

So, you're writing your own repeal, while also supporting someone else's (illegal) proposal?

Also, your own repeal is illegal as well, because its arguments are either based on National Sovereignty (which is illegal because the purpose of these resolutions are to enforce standards among all nations), has real-world references (WHO), or doesn't address the content of the resolution (you can't repeal a resolution for contradictory definitions, and anyway, the definitions are not contradictory because gender dysphoria and transgender are very different things).

I suggest you read the rules and do some actual research on this topic.

[Youssath]

So, you're writing your own repeal, while also supporting someone else's (illegal) proposal?

Also, your own repeal is illegal as well, because its arguments are either based on National Sovereignty (which is illegal because the purpose of these resolutions are to enforce standards among all nations), has real-world references (WHO), or doesn't address the content of the resolution (you can't repeal a resolution for contradictory definitions, and anyway, the definitions are not contradictory because gender dysphoria and transgender are very different things).

I suggest you read the rules and do some actual research on this topic.

We initially had no intentions to write a repeal of GA #467, although it must be stated that the proposal submitted by Royal Bulgaria has garnered some support although it has been defeated for the aforementioned reasons above. There was no understanding that the recommended proposal has been deemed illegal at the point of writing, and that the proposal made by the Royal Bulgaria are purely his. As a result, we might consider taking up the repeal of GA #467 in compliance with international standards.

The real-world references (WHO) and national sovereignty issue will be removed as requested. However, we would like to argue over the clarity of the content of this resolution as shown below:

Extract from General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy”

1. Transgender and gender non-binary people are real.

2. Their experiences are not the product of "mental illness," "confusion," "disease," or anything of the sort -- rather, their understanding of their relationship to the world in the lens of gender does not correspond with their biological sex.

3. Their first-hand accounts of this understanding are real; each person is in the best position to understand and discern their own gender identity.

4. Any distress arising from this real disconnect between sex and gender is referred to as gender dysphoria -- like any mental condition, it ought to be treated.

Clause 2 factually states that the experiences of transgender and gender non-binary people are real (Clause 1) and that their first-hand accounts and testimonies of transgenderism is real (Clause 3) and can be taken in as credible sources. The issue comes in with Clause 4, as the word "distress" as a result of this real disconnect between sex and gender (their gender identity, as per stated in Clause 3) can be taken in as part of their "experiences" (Clause 2) since it invokes extreme anxiety, sorrow or pain as a result of their disconnect in their own gender identity, by Clause 3 these accounts are deemed real and fact, but with Clause 4 arises the status of "gender dysphoria" - a condition which transgenders experience from having to discern their own gender identity - and the fact that it has been referred to as "a mental condition" (Clause 4) - supported by Clause 3 - when their experiences are not the product of mental illness or disease (Clause 2) shows a vivid contradiction in the clarity of the medical status of gender dysphoria, and that whether appropriate medical course is required by the state given the ambiguity of the term "experience" by transgenders. In short, the definition is indeed contradictory since it is not the matter of gender dysphoria and transgender, but rather the experiences of transgenders and gender dysphoria. No one is trying to define transgenderism by another term.

The economic standpoint from having this resolution passed in the General Assembly is still undeniable and does not factor with other WA member states who are unable to comply with this resolution due to huge resource expenditure and fiscal deficit. You will see to it another draft of this repeal soon given the circumstances.

OOC: Forgive me lol, I was simply reading through this text and hoped to agree to it. Will definitely take in your advice and will remove the contradictory sections as accordingly!

[Araraukar]

Extract from General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy”

1. Transgender and gender non-binary people are real.

2. Their experiences are not the product of "mental illness," "confusion," "disease," or anything of the sort -- rather, their understanding of their relationship to the world in the lens of gender does not correspond with their biological sex.

3. Their first-hand accounts of this understanding are real; each person is in the best position to understand and discern their own gender identity.

4. Any distress arising from this real disconnect between sex and gender is referred to as gender dysphoria -- like any mental condition, it ought to be treated.

OOC: All of which 1) are in the preamble, not the active clauses, and 2) establish compliance with a previously existing resolution. So you're basically trying to repeal the wrong resolution, if you're basing your opposition on that.

[East Meranopirus]

We initially had no intentions to write a repeal of GA #467, although it must be stated that the proposal submitted by Royal Bulgaria has garnered some support although it has been defeated for the aforementioned reasons above. There was no understanding that the recommended proposal has been deemed illegal at the point of writing, and that the proposal made by the Royal Bulgaria are purely his. As a result, we might consider taking up the repeal of GA #467 in compliance with international standards.

The real-world references (WHO) and national sovereignty issue will be removed as requested. However, we would like to argue over the clarity of the content of this resolution as shown below:

Extract from General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy”

1. Transgender and gender non-binary people are real.

2. Their experiences are not the product of "mental illness," "confusion," "disease," or anything of the sort -- rather, their understanding of their relationship to the world in the lens of gender does not correspond with their biological sex.

3. Their first-hand accounts of this understanding are real; each person is in the best position to understand and discern their own gender identity.

4. Any distress arising from this real disconnect between sex and gender is referred to as gender dysphoria -- like any mental condition, it ought to be treated.

Clause 2 factually states that the experiences of transgender and gender non-binary people are real (Clause 1) and that their first-hand accounts and testimonies of transgenderism is real (Clause 3) and can be taken in as credible sources. The issue comes in with Clause 4, as the word "distress" as a result of this real disconnect between sex and gender (their gender identity, as per stated in Clause 3) can be taken in as part of their "experiences" (Clause 2) since it invokes extreme anxiety, sorrow or pain as a result of their disconnect in their own gender identity, by Clause 3 these accounts are deemed real and fact, but with Clause 4 arises the status of "gender dysphoria" - a condition which transgenders experience from having to discern their own gender identity - and the fact that it has been referred to as "a mental condition" (Clause 4) - supported by Clause 3 - when their experiences are not the product of mental illness or disease (Clause 2) shows a vivid contradiction in the clarity of the medical status of gender dysphoria, and that whether appropriate medical course is required by the state given the ambiguity of the term "experience" by transgenders. In short, the definition is indeed contradictory since it is not the matter of gender dysphoria and transgender, but rather the experiences of transgenders and gender dysphoria. No one is trying to define transgenderism by another term.

The economic standpoint from having this resolution passed in the General Assembly is still undeniable and does not factor with other WA member states who are unable to comply with this resolution due to huge resource expenditure and fiscal deficit. You will see to it another draft of this repeal soon given the circumstances.

OOC: Forgive me lol, I was simply reading through this text and hoped to agree to it. Will definitely take in your advice and will remove the contradictory sections as accordingly!

FYI, all my previous is OOC, and when I don't mark my post it means it's OOC.

Your economic standpoint is an Honest Mistake in interpretation, as the resolution doesn't say anything about government spending (see Royal Bulgaria's illegal resolution, which had the same argument).

As for the gender dysphoria thing, you misunderstand its definition. Gender dysphoria is distress caused by their biological sex not being the same as their gender identity, so it can be treated through hormone therapy to better align their biological conditions and their gender identity. It is not a mental illness.

[Youssath]

Extract from General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy”

1. Transgender and gender non-binary people are real.

2. Their experiences are not the product of "mental illness," "confusion," "disease," or anything of the sort -- rather, their understanding of their relationship to the world in the lens of gender does not correspond with their biological sex.

3. Their first-hand accounts of this understanding are real; each person is in the best position to understand and discern their own gender identity.

4. Any distress arising from this real disconnect between sex and gender is referred to as gender dysphoria -- like any mental condition, it ought to be treated.

OOC: All of which 1) are in the preamble, not the active clauses, and 2) establish compliance with a previously existing resolution. So you're basically trying to repeal the wrong resolution, if you're basing your opposition on that.

Duly noted. Is there any relevant resolution that does explain this preamble?
Also, the following draft has been made regarding the repeal of "Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy":

General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy” (Category: Civil Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Concerned that the implementation of this bill will impede upon the democratic elements of the General Assembly as it fails to recognize the cultural upbringings and differences of various WA member states that bring us all together to form the World Assembly, most particularly theocratic, conservative and nationalist nations. The repealing of GA #467 ensures a united consensus among all government types of WA member states and that accurate representation of each representative group is required to help serve the hegemony of the World Assembly.

Emphasizing on the economic costs of such a resolution, the affordability of transgender hormone therapy will be directed towards the wrong audience, who will see this as a choice and not a medical treatment as GA #467 expressly requires the legalization of affordable, easy-to-access hormone therapy for all consenting individuals. Such a deluded conclusion based on government subsidised treatment will lead to excessive consumption and wastage of medical resources and services, both of which could be directed into more meaningful projects such as bioresearch. It will also be fiscally irresponsible for any WA member states to allow the continuation of government-subsidized treatment as not all WA member states are able to effectively cover its costs and that GA #467 does not effectively address this problem. As such, the recommendation to repeal GA #467 remains justified based on an economic perspective.

Reiterating the need to set into notion for more clarity towards the legalization of hormone therapy for all consenting individuals, as there need to be more safeguards to protect consenting minors against the discretion of his/her parents. And that mandatory sexual education and mental screening be provided towards consenting individuals in order to prevent any future medical complications or public misinformation regarding transgender hormone therapy in order to ensure proper treatment to those that require it, and not just by consent to prevent the wastage of healthcare resources.

[Youssath]

Your economic standpoint is an Honest Mistake in interpretation, as the resolution doesn't say anything about government spending (see Royal Bulgaria's illegal resolution, which had the same argument).

As for the gender dysphoria thing, you misunderstand its definition. Gender dysphoria is distress caused by their biological sex not being the same as their gender identity, so it can be treated through hormone therapy to better align their biological conditions and their gender identity. It is not a mental illness.

OOC: My economic standpoint did not literally come from huge government spending, but rather I have stated that affordable transgender hormone therapy can be abused in the markets due to its "affordability", which can lead to consumers thinking of it more as a "choice" and less of a "necessity" (defeats the purpose of having transgenders to use this). This will undeniably create an influx of demand in hormone therapy, which if the resolution continues to pass, it will create a huge wastage of healthcare resources that could have gone to other meaningful sectors and continued government subsidies for hormone therapy. Government spending is not the main aim I am trying to drive here, but rather the practicality of such a resolution in regulated market conditions (remember, affordable means government needs to subsidize as accordingly!) with the main aim of high wastage of healthcare resources. High government spending is simply a side-effect to this resolution.

Other than that, I stand corrected on the gender dysphoria definition due to these facts being held as a preamble (will need a GA resolution to support this) and not because of the conflict of definitions. I will be removing that from the draft.

[East Meranopirus]

Duly noted. Is there any relevant resolution that does explain this preamble?
Also, the following draft has been made regarding the repeal of "Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy":

General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy” (Category: Civil Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Concerned that the implementation of this bill will impede upon the democratic elements of the General Assembly as it fails to recognize the cultural upbringings and differences of various WA member states that bring us all together to form the World Assembly, most particularly theocratic, conservative and nationalist nations. The repealing of GA #467 ensures a united consensus among all government types of WA member states and that accurate representation of each representative group is required to help serve the hegemony of the World Assembly.

Emphasizing on the economic costs of such a resolution, the affordability of transgender hormone therapy will be directed towards the wrong audience, who will see this as a choice and not a medical treatment as GA #467 expressly requires the legalization of affordable, easy-to-access hormone therapy for all consenting individuals. Such a deluded conclusion based on government subsidised treatment will lead to excessive consumption and wastage of medical resources and services, both of which could be directed into more meaningful projects such as bioresearch. It will also be fiscally irresponsible for any WA member states to allow the continuation of government-subsidized treatment as not all WA member states are able to effectively cover its costs and that GA #467 does not effectively address this problem. As such, the recommendation to repeal GA #467 remains justified based on an economic perspective.

Reiterating the need to set into notion for more clarity towards the legalization of hormone therapy for all consenting individuals, as there need to be more safeguards to protect consenting minors against the discretion of his/her parents. And that mandatory sexual education and mental screening be provided towards consenting individuals in order to prevent any future medical complications or public misinformation regarding transgender hormone therapy in order to ensure proper treatment to those that require it, and not just by consent to prevent the wastage of healthcare resources.

I believe the resolution Araraukar referred to was GA #91, linked here for your convenience.

As for your draft, I'm not sure what the red text is for, but it's still most definitely illegal. It appears you have taken my comments as an encouragement to write a proposal, which I definitely do not want.

So reading over your draft, your first paragraph argues for National Sovereignty. Now, that by itself isn't illegal, but it is illegal if that's the only argument - which it is, because your second argument on economic costs is also illegal. That argument is what we call an "Honest Mistake". It misinterprets the resolution, as the resolution is clearly targeted to transgender individuals, especially those with gender dysphoria, who seek this treatment, and not anyone else (who wouldn't have a need for it anyway). I can't see how it would lead to abuse. Saying "we should spend the money somewhere else" isn't really addressing the content of the resolution either.

And your last paragraph is legislating in a repeal, which is not allowed ("Reiterating the need..." is legal, but not the sentence after it).

[Youssath]

So reading over your draft, your first paragraph argues for National Sovereignty. Now, that by itself isn't illegal, but it is illegal if that's the only argument - which it is, because your second argument on economic costs is also illegal. That argument is what we call an "Honest Mistake". It misinterprets the resolution, as the resolution is clearly targeted to transgender individuals, especially those with gender dysphoria, who seek this treatment, and not anyone else (who wouldn't have a need for it anyway). I can't see how it would lead to abuse. Saying "we should spend the money somewhere else" isn't really addressing the content of the resolution either.

And your last paragraph is legislating in a repeal, which is not allowed ("Reiterating the need..." is legal, but not the sentence after it).

Unfortunately, the resolution passed did introduce a clause which is questionable at best:

Requires all member-states to legalize hormone therapy for all consenting individuals,

This statement simply calls for all WA member-states to legalize hormone therapy for all consenting individuals. By definition of consenting individuals, it simply meant anyone who is "interested" in opting in for hormone therapy. It does not explicitly state that these individuals need to be transgender or suffering from "gender dysphoria", and even if the interpretation is to be fitted into context, all consenting individuals is way too vague and ambiguous to correctly identify those in need. Does it mean underaged citizens who wanted to try out "hormone therapy" out of hype, or better yet, men who want to become more masculine and decide to opt for hormone therapy?

The objective I am driving here isn't about the money, any country with a substantial welfare system can support such a movement, but rather the wastage of healthcare resources as a result from this ambiguity of "all consenting individuals" which can have long-term implications for any country.

Also, apologies for having to legislate within an appeal. I will see to it being corrected. Thanks!

[East Meranopirus]

Unfortunately, the resolution passed did introduce a clause which is questionable at best:

Requires all member-states to legalize hormone therapy for all consenting individuals,

This statement simply calls for all WA member-states to legalize hormone therapy for all consenting individuals. By definition of consenting individuals, it simply meant anyone who is "interested" in opting in for hormone therapy. It does not explicitly state that these individuals need to be transgender or suffering from "gender dysphoria", and even if the interpretation is to be fitted into context, all consenting individuals is way too vague and ambiguous to correctly identify those in need. Does it mean underaged citizens who wanted to try out "hormone therapy" out of hype, or better yet, men who want to become more masculine and decide to opt for hormone therapy?

The objective I am driving here isn't about the money, any country with a substantial welfare system can support such a movement, but rather the wastage of healthcare resources as a result from this ambiguity of "all consenting individuals" which can have long-term implications for any country.

Also, apologies for having to legislate within an appeal. I will see to it being corrected. Thanks!

Umm...again, it needs to be interpreted in good faith. Clearly, the resolution only targets hormone therapy for transgender individuals, as alluded to in the title and the massive preamble. In regards to underaged citizens, obviously there would be the issue that minors in most nations would probably not be able to give consent by themselves for this type of stuff.

All said, I'm very impressed by your writing and your ability to listen and take feedback. It's just that this is the wrong thing to try your hand on. I suggest looking at the pinned thread on this forum which has ideas for GA resolutions and repeals.

[Youssath]

Umm...again, it needs to be interpreted in good faith. Clearly, the resolution only targets hormone therapy for transgender individuals, as alluded to in the title and the massive preamble. In regards to underaged citizens, obviously there would be the issue that minors in most nations would probably not be able to give consent by themselves for this type of stuff.

All said, I'm very impressed by your writing and your ability to listen and take feedback. It's just that this is the wrong thing to try your hand on. I suggest looking at the pinned thread on this forum which has ideas for GA resolutions and repeals.

Hmm, alright. Due to the aforementioned reasons you've mentioned above, I will be withdrawing the repeal until further notice.

Thanks a lot though haha, it's just that it's my first time writing a repeal resolution and that my laws go contrary towards this resolution. Nevertheless, I will definitely try to see if there's another issue I can possibly contribute into.

[Kenmoria]

Umm...again, it needs to be interpreted in good faith. Clearly, the resolution only targets hormone therapy for transgender individuals, as alluded to in the title and the massive preamble. In regards to underaged citizens, obviously there would be the issue that minors in most nations would probably not be able to give consent by themselves for this type of stuff.

All said, I'm very impressed by your writing and your ability to listen and take feedback. It's just that this is the wrong thing to try your hand on. I suggest looking at the pinned thread on this forum which has ideas for GA resolutions and repeals.

Hmm, alright. Due to the aforementioned reasons you've mentioned above, I will be withdrawing the repeal until further notice.

Thanks a lot though haha, it's just that it's my first time writing a repeal resolution and that my laws go contrary towards this resolution. Nevertheless, I will definitely try to see if there's another issue I can possibly contribute into.

(OOC: That’s good; there is always a need for more, good authors. In the meantime, if you are abandoning this, add [ABANDONED] or something similar to the title.)

[Araraukar]

OOC: I hope you stick around. We like newbies who can take criticism.

[Youssath]

OOC: I hope you stick around. We like newbies who can take criticism.

Actually, pertaining to that, I just read a few repealments and kinda went word-to-word with the construct of GAR #467 in here. I might actually consider going for one last run with this guy to see if this sticks!

General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy” (Category: Civil Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Acknowledging that Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy intends to legalize affordable hormone therapy to transgenders,

Understanding that the Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy aims to resolve the distress of gender dysphoria,

Alarmed at the resolution's lack of clarity on affordable hormone therapy on all consenting individuals, including those medically unfit or illegible to receive it,

Worried that the resolution fails to tackle any misinformation that transgenders are signing up for, and its long-term implications and side effects,

Regretting that the resolution fails to cover that hormone therapy is simply a temporary measure, and that continued hormone therapy is required for transgenders similar to that of drugs,

Further regretting that the resolution does not address nations with different religious practices or values,

Noting that the resolution fails to account for the income classes of transgenders, and that not all transgenders are able to receive treatment.

Further noting that the resolution fails to address transgenders living in poor infrastructural zones, and that specialized medical services such as hormonal therapy may be unavailable to them.

Calling for a more articulate and well-thought out resolution to better clarify and serve transgenders with gender dysphoria.

[Refuge Isle]

Acknowledging that Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy intends to legalize affordable hormone therapy to transgenders,

Was affordable therapy illegal previously?

[...]including those [...] illegible to receive it,

"Illegible" means "unable to be read."

Regretting that the resolution fails to cover that hormone therapy is simply a temporary measure, and that continued hormone therapy is required for transgenders similar to that of drugs,

Notwithstanding that hormone therapy is literally a drug in the definition that it is medication, is there something that differentiates sustained hormone therapy for transgender people as different from a cis person's hormone therapy who is unable to produce their own sex hormone? What's the moral significance of the duration of treatment in regards to the person's wellbeing?

Noting that the resolution fails to account for the income classes of transgenders, and that not all transgenders are able to receive treatment.

That is literally the purpose of the target resolution.

[Youssath]

Was affordable therapy illegal previously?

No, it wasn't. This is simply a reiteration of the resolution's aims.

"Illegible" means "unable to be read."

Darn, I meant the word "ineligible". Thanks a lot!

Notwithstanding that hormone therapy is literally a drug in the definition that it is medication, is there something that differentiates sustained hormone therapy for transgender people as different from a cis person's hormone therapy who is unable to produce their own sex hormone? What's the moral significance of the duration of treatment in regards to the person's wellbeing?

For a female who is unable to produce their own sex hormone in the body, hormone therapy does alleviate stress-inducing hormones, positively affects cognition and delay the onset of Alzheimer’s disease. However, all these positive aliments are thanks to the continued onset of estrogens from hormone treatment. If the supposed patient is unable to obtain the necessary hormone therapy, all of these symptoms will return back - simply because the body is unable to produce its sex hormones - and we will be back to where we've started. Hormone therapy will simply be just a temporary fix to your own natural problems.

As for those who wish to biologically alter their gender, hormone therapy and their administered pills (commonly known as estradiol) will create sudden bursts of estradiol blood serum within the body, in which the body tries to convert to estrone as quickly as possible. This sudden metabolization from estradiol to estrone is what that is correlated to cardiometabolic and thromboembolic morbidity within transgender women (but surprisingly, not transgender men!). Given the long-term nature of this treatment along with transgender bodies' inability to produce the other sex hormones, women stand more vulnerable at risk in getting cardiovascular problems in the long run. This can have huge implications to the person's wellbeing in the long run.

That is literally the purpose of the target resolution.

Hmm. I always felt a bit uneasy writing that statement down. I was hoping to bring forth the notion that affordability is subjective and might not be able to be "affordable" to all transgenders of different income levels. Nevertheless, I will remove this statement since it is fairly contradictory.

Here is the fourth edition to this draft:

General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy” (Category: Civil Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Acknowledging that Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy intends to legalize affordable hormone therapy to transgenders,

Understanding that the Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy aims to resolve the distress of gender dysphoria,

Alarmed at the resolution's lack of clarity on affordable hormone therapy on all consenting individuals, including those medically unfit or ineligible to receive it,

Worried that the resolution fails to tackle any misinformation that transgenders are signing up for, and its long-term implications and side effects,

Regretting that the resolution fails to cover that hormone therapy is simply a temporary measure, and that continued hormone therapy is required for transgenders similar to that of drugs,

Further regretting that the resolution does not address nations with different religious practices or values,

Noting that the resolution failed to recognize the consequences of hormone therapy to a transgender minor, and that it can negatively impact the child's puberty and developmental stages should he/she chooses not to follow through his/her hormone therapy course.

Further noting that the resolution fails to address transgenders living in poor infrastructural zones, and that specialized medical services such as hormonal therapy may be unavailable to them.

Calling for a more articulate and well-thought out resolution to better clarify and serve transgenders with gender dysphoria.

[Araraukar]

Actually, pertaining to that, I just read a few repealments and kinda went word-to-word with the construct of GAR #467 in here. I might actually consider going for one last run with this guy to see if this sticks!

OOC: ...so you're intent on proving that you're going to keep banging your head against the wall instead? I thought you had potential.

Also, put your current draft in the first post. People won't look for it elsewhere in the draft.

As for your draft 3...

Acknowledging that Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy intends to legalize affordable hormone therapy to transgenders

"Transgender" is an adjective, not a noun. You want to use "transgender individuals" or "transgender people". And also, the target doesn't intend to legalize it, it legalizes it. And yes, there's a difference. Think of the difference of you intending to kick a ball vs. you actually kicking a ball.

Understanding that the Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy aims to resolve the distress of gender dysphoria

The resolution doesn't aim to do that, though. It only aims to ensure affordable hormone therapy for transgender individuals. Nothing more, nothing less.

Alarmed at the resolution's lack of clarity on affordable hormone therapy on all consenting individuals, including those medically unfit or illegible to receive it,

As was already mentioned, "illegible" is "not understandable/readable (text)". (EDIT: If you meant ineligible, being transgender and being able to consent make one eligible, so try again.) Also, what is "medically unfit"?

Worried that the resolution fails to tackle any misinformation that transgenders are signing up for, and its long-term implications and side effects,

Reasonability requirement (like, what applies to all resolutions) makes this null, as all medications would have the safety information. Also, what "misinformation"?

Regretting that the resolution fails to cover that hormone therapy is simply a temporary measure, and that continued hormone therapy is required for transgenders similar to that of drugs

Hormone therapy is life-long, not a temporary measure. Which you state yourself, so what's your regret? Also, "drugs" is a slang word, use "medications".

Further regretting that the resolution does not address nations with different religious practices or values

...and this is where you flush your credibility down the drain. The WA doesn't care about your bigoted religious views when they are used to oppress and discriminate. It doesn't matter if your civilization was built on slavery, slavery is still banned. It doesn't matter if human sacrifice was the main pillar of worship in your religion, it's still banned. Do you understand?

Noting that the resolution fails to account for the income classes of transgenders, and that not all transgenders are able to receive treatment

That's literally what the resolution requires nations to do. It's not an error or mistake, it's the purpose. Also what do you mean "not able to receive treatment"?

Further noting that the resolution fails to address transgenders living in poor infrastructural zones, and that specialized medical services such as hormonal therapy may be unavailable to them

Given that there's no specialization required (hormone treatments are necessary and available for cisgender people for various hormonal ailments as well), I don't really know why you're trying to deliberately lie. And also, if a nation is unable to provide the basic healthcare, it's already in violation of at least one previous resolution.

Calling for a more articulate and well-thought out resolution to better clarify and serve transgenders with gender dysphoria.

Write one. Then I'll believe you really mean that.

You also end some clauses with commas and some with periods. Only really the last one should end in a period.

[Morover]

OOC: I've refrained from commenting on any of these repeals because of my obvious bias. However, this does seem to be the most reasonable one out of the bunch, so I'll give some feedback.

IC: "Ambassador, I've made clear that I will only support a repeal if there is a replacement draft up that I believe will do an adequate job of replacing GAR#467. That being said, in writing this, you've shown to be a sufficient author, and I hope to see more from you in the future. My critiques are in red."

General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy” (Category: Civil Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void. Correct me if I'm wrong, for it's been a while since my committee has submitted a repeal, but I believe that this automatically comes up when you try and repeal a resolution. Just make sure you don't put this in the proposal, should you decide to submit this.

In accordance to the World Health Organization, while the definition accepts that gender variant behaviour and preferences alone cannot form the basis of diagnosis for those under this group, it does not exclude its treatment in correlation to other sexual health disorders or issues. The World Health Organization? I've heard of no such thing. Perhaps you are referring to the similarly named World Health Authority.

Calling on General Assembly Resolution #467 “Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy” Clause 2 and 4, which states that distresses experienced from gender dysphoria is explicitly stated to be a mental condition (Clause 4), contrary to the fact that their experiences is explicitly stated not to be a product of "mental illness," "confusion," "disease", or anything of the sort (Clause 2), GA #467 contradicts itself in its definition of the medical nature of transgender and gender non-binary people, and that it only creates confusion for it to be passed in the General Assembly as an international definition. As I believe my delegation has made abundantly clear in the past, a mental condition is not the same as a mental illness. Gender dysphoria is not an illness, it is rather a condition that many people have.

Concerned that the implementation of this bill will impede on the democratic elements of the General Assembly as it fails to recognize the cultural upbringings and differences of various WA member states, most particularly of Islamic theocratic, conservative and nationalist nations. The repealing of GA #467 is best recommended to first ensure a united consensus among all types of WA member states, not just for liberal and democratic nations. Failure to foresee this shall undermine every democratic element that the World Assembly rests upon. I think it's unreasonable to believe that any nation to be able to deprive any citizen of such a vital service to their gender identity. It shouldn't matter what the statewide belief is, so long as it isn't against the individual who is undergoing hormone therapy's belief, in which case they can refrain from the hormone therapy. (OOC: Also, not entirely sure, but I believe mentioning Islam may be an IRL reference and be deemed illegal)

Supporting the concept of "self-determination" and ex injuria jus non-oritur, the matter of transgender hormone therapy is not the subject of debate in international affairs if it violates the constitutional law of the state. Therefore, it shall rest on the authority of the state to govern as she pleases on the subject of "hormone therapy". National sovereignty is a non-issue.

Emphasizing on the economic costs of such a resolution, the affordability of transgender hormone therapy will be directed towards the wrong audience, who will see this as a choice and not a medical treatment as GA #467 expressly requires the legalization of affordable, easy-to-access hormone therapy for all consenting individuals. Such a deluded conclusion based on government subsidised treatment will lead to excessive consumption and wastage of medical resources and services, both of which could be directed into more meaningful projects such as bioresearch. It will also be fiscally irresponsible for any WA member states to allow the continuation of government-subsidized treatment as not all WA member states are able to effectively cover its costs and that GA #467 does not effectively address this problem. As such, the recommendation to repeal GA #467 remains justified based on an economic perspective. The government doesn't even need to subsidize the issuing of hormone therapy, they just need to create laws preventing the cost from going too high. Reasonably, there would be some corporation created that would seize the business opportunity and provide a worldwide service for transgender individuals. There's a plethora of options, many of which don't cost the government money. The only real issues I can see is for autarkic nations, which is an incredibly small minority of nations, and a category that has bigger issues stemming from WA resolutions to worry about, apart from that imposed upon them in GAR#467.

OOC: Please do

around your proposal text. It can be hard to tell that the part about supporting Royal Bulgaria's proposal isn't part of your proposal.

[Youssath]

The fourth draft was released and edited into the first post when you've posted your reply. I would say your criticism at this point is rather passive-aggressive at this point at your use of, unnecessary words, when I have the intentions to construct a logical debate regarding this. Nevertheless, I will still read what you will have to say regarding this repeal:

"Transgender" is an adjective, not a noun. You want to use "transgender individuals" or "transgender people". And also, the target doesn't intend to legalize it, it legalizes it. And yes, there's a difference. Think of the difference of you intending to kick a ball vs. you actually kicking a ball.

Seems fair enough. I do agree that transgender and transgender individuals do have their own interpretations. With regards to the wording "intend", I will see to it being removed.

The resolution doesn't aim to do that, though. It only aims to ensure affordable hormone therapy for transgender individuals. Nothing more, nothing less.

The reason why I am keeping this here is that affordable hormone therapy (aim) is a medical treatment meant to resolve the distress of gender dysphoria (context). I am keeping this here as a support for my next few points.

As was already mentioned, "illegible" is "not understandable/readable (text)". (EDIT: If you meant ineligible, being transgender and being able to consent make one eligible, so try again.) Also, what is "medically unfit"?

Ineligible transgender individuals does not mean that they have yet to give their consent. Think of it this way, transgender athletes, specifically female athletes, will definitely not be allowed to undergo hormone therapy since androgens have the capability to enhance muscular and physical performance. which would be unfair to numerous female athletes given the lack of any resolutions relating to sports or competitions. Medically unfit transgender individuals refer to those with a history of cardiovascular diseases, stroke or cancer. However, I will not be defining "medically unfit" as the repeal is not there to "redefine" the definition of medically unfit or such, that would be adding legislation that was previously not mentioned in GAR #467 and would be illegal.

Reasonability requirement (like, what applies to all resolutions) makes this null, as all medications would have the safety information. Also, what "misinformation"?

That hormone therapy is still an evolving medical practice, and just because medications prescribed have safety information within doesn't mean that it is suitable for all individuals. There are these things called "allergies", and given the social stigma on transgenderism from the lack of international consensus, you won't be surprised to find conservative people out there not knowing what this therapy is.

Hormone therapy is life-long, not a temporary measure. Which you state yourself, so what's your regret? Also, "drugs" is a slang word, use "medications".

Yet again with the passive-aggressiveness. I won't entertain criticisms if it involves personal instigation and such.

...and this is where you flush your credibility down the drain. The WA doesn't care about your bigoted religious views when they are used to oppress and discriminate. It doesn't matter if your civilization was built on slavery, slavery is still banned. It doesn't matter if human sacrifice was the main pillar of worship in your religion, it's still banned. Do you understand?

Not if the national sovereignty argument is the main sole point of the repeal. Do you see any national sovereignty arguments other than this mere acknowledgement of facts?

That's literally what the resolution requires nations to do. It's not an error or mistake, it's the purpose. Also what do you mean "not able to receive treatment"?

This has been edited out. Feel free to comment in the next version of the draft.

Given that there's no specialization required (hormone treatments are necessary and available for cisgender people for various hormonal ailments as well), I don't really know why you're trying to deliberately lie. And also, if a nation is unable to provide the basic healthcare, it's already in violation of at least one previous resolution.

Specialized drugs in the form that is not as popular as paracetamol and such. A nation can boast to be providing the basic healthcare, but if it has no roads, few clinics with proper equipment and medication and is hard to access by geographical means, then this resolution will not solve their problem.

Write one. Then I'll believe you really mean that.

You also end some clauses with commas and some with periods. Only really the last one should end in a period.

To me, it feels like you are trying to agitate a situation out of a constructive discussion. Some of your feedback is constructive, but if that is your definition of "constructive criticism", then I would recommend that you take up some basic respect and etiquette before leaving your own personal remarks here. Out of all of the criticism I have replied thus far, yours have been the most critical and disrespectful that I have ever seen in this discussion. If you want people to reply back to you nicely, jolly well do the same. Respect is a two-way street, pal.

[Youssath]

OOC: I've refrained from commenting on any of these repeals because of my obvious bias. However, this does seem to be the most reasonable one out of the bunch, so I'll give some feedback.

IC: "Ambassador, I've made clear that I will only support a repeal if there is a replacement draft up that I believe will do an adequate job of replacing GAR#467. That being said, in writing this, you've shown to be a sufficient author, and I hope to see more from you in the future. My critiques are in red."

OOC: Please do

around your proposal text. It can be hard to tell that the part about supporting Royal Bulgaria's proposal isn't part of your proposal.

IC: The Youssathian Ambassador rushes forward, nearly tripping over as he handed over the Morovian Ambassador a final note, detailing the most recent draft of the repeal since the first draft. "Oh, my sincerest apologies! I have forgotten to inform you of the updates we have made to our draft! I am sorry for having to spend your time on these... outdated documents. I am sure that this won't happen again!".

OOC: My bad, I must have placed the wrong edition of the draft in the front post.
I have placed the new draft as the first post of this thread. Not to worry though, I will still take in what you have previously mentioned in the first draft!

Also, if everyone wants me to replace GAR #467, I don't mind being up for it. I will compose the draft after I get my sleep.

[The Christian God]

Further regretting that the resolution does not address nations with different religious practices or values,

You would think that nations with religious values would consider actually following those values and loving thine neighbor. I am a Wrathful lord, but I didn't think you lot would get that much of my wrath.

[Araraukar]

Think of it this way, transgender athletes, specifically female athletes, will definitely not be allowed to undergo hormone therapy since androgens have the capability to enhance muscular and physical performance. which would be unfair to numerous female athletes given the lack of any resolutions relating to sports or competitions.

OOC: So ban them from partaking the sports if they take the hormones. You don't get to decide they are not eligible for hormone therapy. And what about transwomen? Would you be fine with them competing?

Medically unfit transgender individuals refer to those with a history of cardiovascular diseases, stroke or cancer.

Suicide is specifically legalized by WA, so if they want to take the risk with their health or life, there's nothing you can do to stop them without being contradictory. Also, the same applies to every single medication as nothing is without the chance of serious side-effects. I have permanent medication of a med that could, if you were really unlucky, cause all your skin to slouch off. (Naturally didn't happen to me because I'm still on the medication.) I knew the risks when I started the medication, because my doctor warned me about it (it manifests as skin lesions at first) when prescribing it.

However, I will not be defining "medically unfit" as the repeal is not there to "redefine" the definition of medically unfit or such

Then you're just misrepresenting (aka lying) the target resolution. Lying in a repeal is called Honest Mistake, whether it's honest or not.

That hormone therapy is still an evolving medical practice, and just because medications prescribed have safety information within doesn't mean that it is suitable for all individuals.

See what I said above.

There are these things called "allergies"

You literally cannot be allergic to either estrogen or testosterone, because your body produces both naturally. If you're allergic to some specific delivery method, then just pick another one. It's really that simple in RL, so why would it be any more difficult in NS RP?

transgenderism

It's not a philosophy or religion, so it's not an "ism" any more than having blue eyes or brown skin is.

the lack of international consensus

Given about 75% vote for, on the target resolution, I'd say that's a pretty good international consensus.

you won't be surprised to find conservative people out there not knowing what this therapy is.

It's literally defined in the target resolution. If the conservative people can't read, that's really not the fault of the resolution.

Yet again with the passive-aggressiveness. I won't entertain criticisms if it involves personal instigation and such.

...what? What passive-aggressiveness? Also, I tend towards the aggressive-aggressiveness, and you'd know if I did that, trust me. Your proposal literally says "continued hormone therapy is required for transgenders", which means you acknowledge that it's life-long.

Not if the national sovereignty argument is the main sole point of the repeal. Do you see any national sovereignty arguments other than this mere acknowledgement of facts?

...where did I say anything about NatSov Only violation? But you basically complaining that the WA doesn't let discriminate however you please is just silly, given that that's the whole point of human rights resolutions.

Specialized drugs in the form that is not as popular as paracetamol and such.

So 99.99% of medications are specialized drugs in your opinion?

A nation can boast to be providing the basic healthcare, but if it has no roads, few clinics with proper equipment and medication and is hard to access by geographical means, then this resolution will not solve their problem.

Annnnnd they'll already be in violation of at least one, probably two existing resolutions. Your point?

To me, it feels like you are trying to agitate a situation out of a constructive discussion. Some of your feedback is constructive, but if that is your definition of "constructive criticism", then I would recommend that you take up some basic respect and etiquette before leaving your own personal remarks here.

You're literally trying to say I don't exist or that I shouldn't exist, and much of your proposal is fucking insulting, so it's a bit difficult not to take it personally. In addition, constructive criticism is constructive criticism, whether you like or agree with it or not. I'm well within forum etiquette, and I have no respect whatsoever for people wanting to use religion as the excuse to oppress minorities. If you want my respect, you'll abandon this repeal attempt like you already said you would.

Out of all of the criticism I have replied thus far, yours have been the most critical

Write a better proposal then.

and disrespectful

I could do this in IC, if you wanted to see real disrespect. I'm actually being much more respectful with staying OOC, because this way I can't call you names and get away with it.

If you want people to reply back to you nicely, jolly well do the same. Respect is a two-way street, pal.

I don't need your respect. You on the other hand need to stop lying in your proposal if you want it to have any chance of passing.

Also, the use of "pal" always makes me think of the South Park exchange...

[Morover]

OOC: I've refrained from commenting on any of these repeals because of my obvious bias. However, this does seem to be the most reasonable one out of the bunch, so I'll give some feedback.

IC: "Ambassador, I've made clear that I will only support a repeal if there is a replacement draft up that I believe will do an adequate job of replacing GAR#467. That being said, in writing this, you've shown to be a sufficient author, and I hope to see more from you in the future. My critiques are in red."

OOC: Please do

around your proposal text. It can be hard to tell that the part about supporting Royal Bulgaria's proposal isn't part of your proposal.

IC: The Youssathian Ambassador rushes forward, nearly tripping over as he handed over the Morovian Ambassador a final note, detailing the most recent draft of the repeal since the first draft. "Oh, my sincerest apologies! I have forgotten to inform you of the updates we have made to our draft! I am sorry for having to spend your time on these... outdated documents. I am sure that this won't happen again!".

OOC: My bad, I must have placed the wrong edition of the draft in the front post.
I have placed the new draft as the first post of this thread. Not to worry though, I will still take in what you have previously mentioned in the first draft!

Also, if everyone wants me to replace GAR #467, I don't mind being up for it. I will compose the draft after I get my sleep.

OOC: Don't get me wrong, I don't want you to replace. I think the arguments you made are not sufficient cause to replace it, honestly. I just mean the only way I could possibly support a repeal is if several things happen. Firstly, and most importantly, if someone finds a legitimate issue with the resolution itself. This does not include the arguments of "affordable is vague", "contradictory preambulatory clauses", or "The idea of being transgender disgusts me". Secondly, the repeal must have a rather good replacement to go into effect directly after the repeal is passed, should it be passed. Quite frankly, I don't see enough issues with the text of the resolution to justify a repeal + replace.

IC: Darin Perise, the usual Morovian ambassador, seems rather flustered at mixing up the papers. He is joined by a scrawnier looking gentleman, who has a slight eyelid twitch. "Apologies, I must have gotten the papers from all these different repeals mixed up. You must understand, there have been more than a dozen repeal attempts in the past few days, and I'm finding the various flyers are becoming rather confusing. Regardless, I have brought a man in with me today who is perhaps better suited to respond to this repeal. May I introduce Jonathan Jer, the original author of the resolution text."

"Hello, yes, I'm Jonathan Jer. I usually let Darin debate on my behalf since he has a cooler head than I do," the scrawny man says rather nervously, stepping forward. "Regardless, I have annotated your proposal in red."

Acknowledging that Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy legalizes affordable hormone therapy to transgender individuals, Yes, indeed. I believed that to be a given, what with the title and all. I suppose you may keep this, if you like.

Understanding that the Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy aims to resolve the distress of gender dysphoria, As it does.

Alarmed at the resolution's lack of clarity on affordable hormone therapy on all consenting individuals, including those medically unfit or ineligible to receive it, Everyone is eligible to receive it. All they have to do is consent. The idea that one should be ineligible to receive the therapy because they are "medically unfit," as you put it, is absurd. They consented, for God's sake. That's literally the only thing that matters.

Worried that the resolution fails to tackle any misinformation that transgenders are signing up for, and its long-term implications and side effects, I could care less, honestly. If they don't know what they're getting into, they're stupid. That's a them-problem. Perhaps someone wishes to write a proposal about the prevention of medical misinformation, but that's not my concern.

Regretting that the resolution fails to cover that hormone therapy is simply a temporary measure, and that continued hormone therapy is required for transgenders similar to that of medication, What are you on, ambassador? That is utterly irrelevant to the target text.

Further regretting that the resolution does not address nations with different religious practices or values, Screw them. They're specifically who I wrote this proposal to combat. If your religion inherently believes in oppressing a person based on their gender, there's something wrong with your religion.

Noting that the resolution failed to recognize the consequences of hormone therapy to a transgender minor, and that it can negatively impact the child's puberty and developmental stages should he/she chooses not to follow through his/her hormone therapy course, "consenting" implies of age of consent. Personally, I think it's unnecessary, I think it should be especially legal for children, but I imagine that has less support than just legalizing for all of-age individuals would have.

Further noting that the resolution fails to address transgenders living in poor infrastructural zones, and that specialized medical services such as hormonal therapy may be unavailable to them, My colleague, Mr. Perise, has answered this issue repeatedly. If you're worried about accessibility, make it accessible. Easy.

Calling for a more articulate and well-thought out resolution to better clarify and serve transgenders with gender dysphoria. Try and write one. Go ahead, I'll have Darin call me when it's up to I can explain to you once more why it's utterly unnecessary.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Patients Rights Act.