[CLOSED] Taxpayer Protection Act

[Burn Swi]

CLOSED

[Tinhampton]

Delegate-Ambassador Alexander Smith, Tinhampton's leading WA official: OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH YEAH, BABY!

[WayNeacTia]

And just category are you planning on shoehorning this into?

[Morover]

"You define 'taxpayer' and then proceed to not use the term in the draft at all - why? Beyond the ridiculously flawed concept here, this does not protect taxpayers in any way whatsoever."

[Madison and Wisconsin]

"You define 'taxpayer' and then proceed to not use the term in the draft at all - why? Beyond the ridiculously flawed concept here, this does not protect taxpayers in any way whatsoever."

Agreed. If the title is about taxpayer protection, then the main focus of the resolution should be taxpayer protection.

[Burn Swi]

CLOSED

[West Kronisia]

This is mightily flawed;

1) It essentially makes it so that those seeking abortions have to do so out of their own pockets, which would be absurd in us countries with free healthcare, and is therefore restrictive to those who are poor, counter to the "distributing the funds to the poor" section, which is the mainstay of my reason for why I would not support this resolution.

2) As someone else has mentioned; No category

3) I feel like what you are aiming for would be better done by repealing GAR#286 and then replacing it with a new resolution tailored to fit the different criteria you set forth, although I can see why one would not try that, as i can foresee the repeal failing, and therefore you wouldn't be able to put through the changes.

4(?) Can resolutions countermand each other? This would obviously run against parts of GAR #286 as it mentions various pieces it would change which would surely invalidate #286 to some degree, again better served by a repeal and redo? (More a question than necessarily a flaw),

[WayNeacTia]

"You define 'taxpayer' and then proceed to not use the term in the draft at all - why? Beyond the ridiculously flawed concept here, this does not protect taxpayers in any way whatsoever."

Fixed. Thank you for your advice. As for category, I am not sure, but will list civil rights, mild for now.

It's not Civil Rights. "A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights" this is not.

[WayNeacTia]

The Taxpayer Protection Act

Civil Rights- Mild

Recognizing that GAR #286, the Reproductive Freedoms Act, establishes certain protections for people seeking an abortion,

Recognizing that many people have religious or moral belief that cause them to dislike the operation of abortion,

Appalled that these people are forced every year to finance these abortions through their tax dollars,

Hopeful that the World Assembly can strike a compromise on the issue of abortion,

The World Assembly Hereby,

1. Defines, for the purpose of this resolution:
a) “Abortion” as the termination of pregnancy,
b) “Taxpayer” as a sapient being legally required by the government to pay currency to the government,

2. Mandates that no taxpayer funds from both the World Assembly or individual nations will go to the funding of abortion,

3. Encourages member-nations to redirect abortion fund to help the poor and needy,

4. Clarifies that nothing is this resolution shall be construed to change, influence, praise, or condemn individual nations policies on the legality of abortion.

For posterity seeing as how the OP couldn't have the decency to just leave the draft up.