[DRAFT] Ban on Person-sourced Meats

[Yxnadalsoxl]

In any case, ideological ban or not, I remain deeply concerned about this text's oversight of vampirism.

We do not have to believe that actual vampires exist in order for this to be of concern: the whole premise of wanting to ban cannibalism to be deeply disturbed by it, enjoining the thought that (mostly) only deeply disturbed persons, or persons growing in deeply disturbed cultures, would partake on it. In the same vein (haha) deeply disturbed persons who think they are vampires, may source meat blood from a range of deeply disturbing ways, ranging from battery, robbing blood banks, or simply paying poor people.

Also, it would be questionable if the WA would prosecute those nations, which have children who eat their fingernails. The text does not make exception for people who eat their own body parts.

Do fingernails count as "meat"?

I don't know. "Meat" is not defined anywhere, a serious oversight, in my opinion. Is bone marrow meat? Are eyeballs meat? Hair? The text leaves us in deafening silence.

I think the Ambassador agrees with me that blood is not "meat", as implying so would be an extreme exercise of the imagination.

Maybe the intent is for people to taste for themselves where the boundaries lie?

[Yxnadalsoxl]

Do fingernails count as "meat"?

I don't know. "Meat" is not defined anywhere, a serious oversight, in my opinion. Is bone marrow meat? Are eyeballs meat? Hair? The text leaves us in deafening silence.

I think the Ambassador agrees with me that blood is not "meat", as implying so would be an extreme exercise of the imagination.

Maybe the intent is for people to taste for themselves where the boundaries lie?

OOC: Also, "hair as cannibalism" is not an esoteric exercise in imagination.

The thought may be an appetite killer, but human hair can be used to make an additive that is found in foods such as the dough for pizza crusts and bagels.

Your mop top is a rich source of L-cysteine, an amino acid that can be extracted from hair and used as a flavour enhancer or flour improver. It is sometimes listed as E920 on food packaging. As well as being found in dough it can be used to give food a meat-like flavour, especially in dog food.

Ten to 15 years ago human hair was a main source of L-cysteine. Producers, mainly based in China, extracted it from hair clippings from salons, even strands collected from hairbrushes.

But as people became more aware of what was in their food, they simply didn't like the thought of human hair having anything to do with what they ate. More Chinese people also started perming their hair, which made extracting the amino acid more difficult.

"As more people found out where L-cysteine came from they thought 'yuck, human hair, don't fancy that'," says a spokesman for Premium Ingredients, a major distributor of ingredients for the food, fragrance and pharmaceutical industries.

"It was also extracted from mainly Chinese hair because it is straight, making the process much easier and cheaper. But more and more people started using perm lotions which made the process more complicated and costly."

[Yxnadalsoxl]

Also, this Moral Decency text is wholly devoted to food safety.

So I went to the passed resolutions to confirm a hunch...

Food and Drug Standards
A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare.

Category: Social Justice
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Greenlandic People

Description: OBSERVING the poor or irregular quality control in the food and drug industries of many nations

BELIEVING that such poor quality assurance in business endangers the consumer’s health and living standard

SEEKING to establish a firm system of quality control and standards in these industries and eliminate unsanitary and unethical food production

Hereby:

REQUIRES member-states to regularly inspect their quality control facilities in order to ensure that they are performing to the established international standards

DEMANDS that all food and drug products produced in member states must undergo safety and quality screening before being released to the consumer market

CREATES the World Assembly Food and Drug Regulatory Agency (WAFDRA)

CHARGES the WAFDRA with the responsibility to ensure that the food and drug regulatory agencies of member-states are performing satisfactorily; also to gradually implement reforms to the quality regulation authorities of member-states

MANDATES that such reforms shall include:
(A)The creation of a quality grade system by which all food and drug products shall receive a grade marking their relative level of quality and safety

(B)The establishment of forfeits for any businesses that attempt to evade safety standards upon their products; the nature and degree of such forfeits being left at the discretion of the WAFDRA and the establishment of appropriate legal consequences should any quality control facilities be found to be failing in their duty to assure the quality of the products they are charged with inspecting

(C)The creation of a team of WAFDRA inspectors who shall visit product inspection facilities on an annual basis or earlier upon the request of the committee in order to determine if they are still performing adequately to the standards of the WAFDRA

(D)The creation of an overall international standard to which all inspection facilities in member-states shall be measured against; also the creation of international standards by which to measure the safety of food and drug products

ASSERTS that in nations where there is no system of quality control the WAFDRA shall work with the national government to eventually establish such agencies

EMPOWERS the WAFDRA order the closure of any food and drug regulatory facilities that are found to repeatedly fail to succeed in ensuring the quality of the products being inspected; the closure shall be carried out by national law-enforcement

ORDERS that food and drug products being sold must bear upon them a label certified by the WAFDRA which clearly displays the quality grade that the product has been given by national quality-inspection facilities

NOTES that producers and vendors of de minimis quantities of food and drugs shall be exempt from the above clauses so long as they post visible notice at their place of sales that they are not operating under international standards

Votes For: 3,178
Votes Against: 1,864

Implemented Sat Sep 26 2009

[WAR64 on NS] [WAR64 on NSwiki] [Official Debate Topic]

I don't see how #64 does not already require everything that this proposal seeks to achieve. And where this proposal is not wholly duplicative, it infringes on the religious liberty of Catholics, by literally banning their religion. #64 does no such thing.

[Yxnadalsoxl]

Also, this Moral Decency text is wholly devoted to food safety.

And yes, ALSO, because of this, wrong category.

Regulation -- A resolution to enact uniform standards that protect workers, consumers, and the general public.

As of September, 2018 this is our newest category. many previous resolutions that previously had awkward preambles justifying why they fit into this category or that actually probably belong here now. The categories are:

Consumer Protection: Increasing consumer rights, product standards, accurate labeling, and legal recourse for consumer David against the corporate Goliath.
Examples to come

Regulation/Consumer Protection is a far more natural fit for this text.

[Simone Republic]

I think we should eventually bring this to the GA just to get rid of this bizarre obsession with cannibalism with some WA members.

No particular rush at the moment given that some of the author's resolutions have been in drafting for years before submission.

[Potted Plants United]

OOC: Wouldn't this cause issues with international organ transplants and bodies/flesh donated posthumously for medical research? As meat is not defined, I don't see anything that would exclude medical uses.

[El Lazaro]

Considering the rapid biomedical advances that are being made, what about using non-person chimaeras to grow meat identical to that from persons and vice versa? Does the proposal target the grower, substance, or both? IMO the latter wouldn’t be “person-sourced” and the latter may not fit the traditional definition of cannibalism.

[Simone Republic]

Bump. I support eventually passing this

[Republic of Mesque]

"Ban this, ban that, ban everything I dislike, because I can."
Indeed, this resolution holds itself together because of a pathological notion of "convincement" of this General's Assembly's moral superiority. [Excerpt REDACTED by HM's Minister for the WA].
That being said, 4. appears to vaguely mention disease, so... support? [HM further believes that the Preamble should contain an objective argument against cannibalism, such as its correlation to a deadly disease.]

Edit 2: Also, where are the alien nations claiming that their basic food chain depends on the consumption of humanoid meat? They would be very distraught at a "Ban on Person-sourced Meats", no? Not that the Assembly would care about them, of course, it is more important to just ban this for the sake of it.

[Imperium Anglorum]

I've been ill for the last week and a half and will return to work with a lot of stuff to do. Inasmuch as that is the case, I release this draft for general use, provided that I am credited as co-author.

[Kenmoria]

“My commentary goes to whichever delegation wishes to pursue this draft.” Ambassador Fortier says. “It is that the preamble and the operative clauses do not align. The preamble suggests that consent is the normative problem with cannibalism, yet the operative clauses imply that it is cannibalism itself which is deontologically wrongful. Nowhere do they have any exception for consent, nor for necessity.”

[Simone Republic]

“My commentary goes to whichever delegation wishes to pursue this draft.” Ambassador Fortier says. “It is that the preamble and the operative clauses do not align. The preamble suggests that consent is the normative problem with cannibalism, yet the operative clauses imply that it is cannibalism itself which is deontologically wrongful. Nowhere do they have any exception for consent, nor for necessity.”

If there are no volunteers, I am happy to take this draft forward and submit with IA as co-author with the changes proposed by Kenmoria.

Especially since I was the one complaining the loudest about "hair cannibalism" and "green radish and carrot and human head soup" on WALL, I might as well take the campaign to its logical conclusion.

[Chipoli]

I'd be willing to work on this as well.

[Anne of Cleves in TNP]

1. In this resolution "meat derived from a person" is meat, derived from a person per the definition of a person in the jurisdiction in which the meat was derived.

OOC: I agree with the aforementioned complaints about the lack of exceptions for consent and necessity. But also, could whoever is taking on this proposal be sure to simplify the definition laid out in clause 1? People would better comprehend the definition if it didn’t repeat the words “meat” and “person” 3 times each.