[Draft] Repeal Ban on Forced Blood Sports

[Balkede]

This Grand, Revered and Venerated World Assembly,

Observing the passage of the resolution "Ban on Forced Blood Sports" (GA#498), which forbade most instances of blood sports from occurring;

Dumbfounded that religious sacrifice is excluded from the definition of blood sports for no good reason, not only allowing barbaric practices to continue without penalty on the basis of religious dogma, but also incentivising the usage or creation of religions as a pretext for blood sports, undermining the resolution's effectiveness;

Disturbed that a blood sport which occurs between a person and an animal, but the person consents and is the only participant at risk of endangerment, such as more humane bullfighting where the bulls are not placed at risk of harm and are released in the end, are prohibited as per GA#498; and

Convinced that GA#498 is a poorly written mess of a resolution, and should be removed from standing international law;

Hereby repeals GA#498, "Ban on Forced Blood Sports".

I have withdrawn my submitted proposal and have submitted this draft on this forum for everyone's perusal.

[Tinhampton]

Out of interest, why did you withdraw a previous proposal of the same name four hours before it was due to go to vote?

[Balkede]

Out of interest, why did you withdraw a previous proposal of the same name four hours before it was due to go to vote?

Kenmoria recommended withdrawing it, and a person in XKI's forums did make good rebuttals against my arguments, so I decided to withdraw and listen to feedback so it can have a chance at passing

[Balkede]

Should I abandon this?

[Tinhampton]

I dunno, nobody's offered any substantiative feedback on it here (positive or negative)

[Hopal]

I don't know if religious sacrifice can be defined as a blood sport, particularly the sport part, sure there in some instances sacrifice can be used in and as a sport, or a game, but I think for the purposes of religious sacrifice in general it may be more beneficial to write a new resolution for a ban on religious sacrifice.

[Ardiveds]

"Ambassador, we would like to point out religious sacrifice of sapient individuals is already prohibited under current WA law."

[Balkede]

I don't know if religious sacrifice can be defined as a blood sport, particularly the sport part, sure there in some instances sacrifice can be used in and as a sport, or a game, but I think for the purposes of religious sacrifice in general it may be more beneficial to write a new resolution for a ban on religious sacrifice.

The qualifier for blood sport in GA#498 is entertainment, and rituals can be classified as it. Also writing a new resolution to cover it will be duplication, so we have no choice but to repeal this.

"Ambassador, we would like to point out religious sacrifice of sapient individuals is already prohibited under current WA law."

Not animals though, but I should clarify that.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Elsie Mortimer Wellesley. We will never vote in favour of any legislation which attempts to legitimise any prohibition of Roman religious practices. The divinity of the republic shall be fully enforced just as it always has been since 0 RE. Those who would turn their backs to the gods and to the charity provided by the temples also turn their back on society writ large. They will get their just deserts in poverty, misery, and starvation.

That said, animal sacrifice is not primarily an entertainment matter; most sacrifices are done for the purposes of consumption. (OOC. Patrick Faas, Around the Roman table (2006) 246; Gunnel Ekroth, 'Animal Sacrifice in Antiquity' in Gordon Lindsay Campbell (ed), The Oxford Handbook of Animals in Classical Thought and Life (2014).) The idea that animal sacrifices are cruel also is a Galilean lie created by subversive anarchist heathens who seek to rupture the sanctity and unity of the Roman people. Sacrificial animals dying un-peacefully is a bad omen. (OOC. Faas, supra at 249.)

[Gatchina]

Elsie Mortimer Wellesley. We will never vote in favour of any legislation which attempts to legitimise any prohibition of Roman religious practices. The divinity of the republic shall be fully enforced just as it always has been since 0 RE. Those who would turn their backs to the gods and to the charity provided by the temples also turn their back on society writ large. They will get their just deserts in poverty, misery, and starvation.

That said, animal sacrifice is not primarily an entertainment matter; most sacrifices are done for the purposes of consumption. (OOC. Patrick Faas, Around the Roman table (2006) 246; Gunnel Ekroth, 'Animal Sacrifice in Antiquity' in Gordon Lindsay Campbell (ed), The Oxford Handbook of Animals in Classical Thought and Life (2014).) The idea that animal sacrifices are cruel also is a Galilean lie created by subversive anarchist heathens who seek to rupture the sanctity and unity of the Roman people. Sacrificial animals dying un-peacefully is a bad omen. (OOC. Faas, supra at 249.)

We agree with the esteemed Ambassador here. Gatchina fully intends to support this repeal. Wishing much luck and success!

[Ardiveds]

Elsie Mortimer Wellesley. We will never vote in favour of any legislation which attempts to legitimise any prohibition of Roman religious practices. The divinity of the republic shall be fully enforced just as it always has been since 0 RE. Those who would turn their backs to the gods and to the charity provided by the temples also turn their back on society writ large. They will get their just deserts in poverty, misery, and starvation.

That said, animal sacrifice is not primarily an entertainment matter; most sacrifices are done for the purposes of consumption. (OOC. Patrick Faas, Around the Roman table (2006) 246; Gunnel Ekroth, 'Animal Sacrifice in Antiquity' in Gordon Lindsay Campbell (ed), The Oxford Handbook of Animals in Classical Thought and Life (2014).) The idea that animal sacrifices are cruel also is a Galilean lie created by subversive anarchist heathens who seek to rupture the sanctity and unity of the Roman people. Sacrificial animals dying un-peacefully is a bad omen. (OOC. Faas, supra at 249.)

"But the resolution this repeal is targetting doesn't prohibit animal sacrifice, it specifically states that in the very text of the resolution."

[Kenmoria]

“If you want to put that that the target is a ‘poorly-written mess’, you will need more than two reasons for a repeal. I have seen several poorly-written messes in my time here, and these were characterised by an abundance of errors, rather than just two.”

[Honeydewistania]

Elsie Mortimer Wellesley. We will never vote in favour of any legislation which attempts to legitimise any prohibition of Roman religious practices. The divinity of the republic shall be fully enforced just as it always has been since 0 RE. Those who would turn their backs to the gods and to the charity provided by the temples also turn their back on society writ large. They will get their just deserts in poverty, misery, and starvation.

That said, animal sacrifice is not primarily an entertainment matter; most sacrifices are done for the purposes of consumption. (OOC. Patrick Faas, Around the Roman table (2006) 246; Gunnel Ekroth, 'Animal Sacrifice in Antiquity' in Gordon Lindsay Campbell (ed), The Oxford Handbook of Animals in Classical Thought and Life (2014).) The idea that animal sacrifices are cruel also is a Galilean lie created by subversive anarchist heathens who seek to rupture the sanctity and unity of the Roman people. Sacrificial animals dying un-peacefully is a bad omen. (OOC. Faas, supra at 249.)

"But the resolution this repeal is targetting doesn't prohibit animal sacrifice, it specifically states that in the very text of the resolution."

"Ah, but because this repeal has an argument based on the fact that animal sacrifice isn't banned, so it wishes for legislation to do exactly that, that's what EMW was talking about."