Link to the debate thread:https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=499231
Argument:
Rules potentially violated:
Strength: This determines the effect a proposal has on a nation's policy. A proposal with mild language or affecting a narrow area of policy is Mild, while one which a very broad area of policy in a dramatic way is Strong. Anything in between is Significant. Some categories don't use strength but rather a specific area, so proposals will need to specify the area of policy affected from a pre-populated list of options. These options do have a statistical effect and strength.
The strength is mild.
However, many communities live according to honor codes/honor, and their enforcement is - as is any other type of enforcement - based on violence. Without enforcement, these codes collapse.
In these communities, honor decides nearly all facets of life, making it very very important....
This proposal would totally upend the control of these communities over their individual members - in member nations - , making it a proposal with a very wide-ranging effect and strong language. This puts the real strength of this proposal at "Strong". You could maybe argue for "significant" if you take into account that not every community has a honor code.
But not "Mild". This is simply not a "Mild" proposal. Strong language("Prohibits";"Requires"....) and a gigantic effect on many communities in member nations do not fulfill the criteria for "Mild".