Coronational Chechyans and affiliates wrote:I have nothing against transgender people. I stand strongly against forcing these permanent medical treatments onto children. If your not old enough to consent to sex because they are not mentally ready they shouldn't be able to change their sex.
I haven't been happy with the world assembly for a while but this is the straw that broke the camel's back for me. Not to be a Natsov but the original intention of this assembly was to deal with international issues. things like nuclear weapons or trade treaties. How in the world is the decision to legalize or prohibit medication for optional sex reassignment, to children mind you an international concern?
Ambassador Van Rooy sits in the corner of the voting lobby
"It's an international issue in the same way those issues are. Some nations possess weapons of mass destruction and favorable trade terms. Many of us, albeit not all of us, desire those things. It's on us to ensure that all of us are bounded on an agreeable and acceptable code of conduct surrounding those subjects. That way, nations have at least minimal guidance on how to approach these subjects.
The same thing goes for what many deem 'civil or human rights'--those of us who possess them must set agreeable and acceptable minimums for those of us who do not possess them so that when your nation inevitably does rise up from the backwater of moral turpitude that is decrying "permanent medical treatments onto children", your nation knows exactly what it must protect.
Or rather what it will protect to remain a member in good standing of this Assembly....and out of the clutches of the Compliance Commission as well."