[PASSED] - Repeal "Rights of Sapient Species"

[Goobergunchia]

This has been re-drafted following a legality challenge.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=540090

Proposed replacement (in last call):
viewtopic.php?ns=1&f=9&t=539064

Original debate:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=348943

Target resolution:
https://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_pa ... /start=354

Draft 3

The World Assembly (WA),

Applauds the intention of GAR#355 to protect the rights of all sapient species, reflecting the diversity of species across the multiverse;

Notes, however, that the target resolution has significant flaws that neuter its ability to protect the rights of sapient species, namely the lack of a definition over what constitutes:

1. "mentally ill" under paragraph 6 of the resolution, thus allowing for varying and potentially malicious interpretations in the absence of any WA resolutions to the contrary, and
   
2. "normal" adult humans under paragraph 8 of the resolution, thus granting broad discretion to each WA state to interpret this clause at will, noting differences in age, maturity and other matters;

Believes that the WA already has numerous resolutions in place that protect the rights of sapient individuals; and

Strives for a replacement that rectifies such defects, and the lack of clarity in the target resolution, if the WA deems it necessary; hereby

Repeals GA#355, "Rights of Sapient Species."

[The Ice States]

"Full support, given these flaws and the target author. We hope that a replacement is proposed soon."

~Alexander Nicholas Saverchenko-Colleti,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Communal Union of the Ice States.

[Juansonia]

"Opposed, due to the apparent lack of a replacement draft." - Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia

[Simone Republic]

"Opposed, due to the apparent lack of a replacement draft." - Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia

Working on that. Will not be ready for sometime as we would like to shut all loopholes in one go.

There's also the issue that Psychiatric Care Act dropped out of queue, so the "mentally ill" is even more vulnerable.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=528372

[Simone Republic]

Bump. Replace is pending.

[Hannasea]

OOC: Haven't read it, but support. Sapient is a silly word.

[Bigpipstan]

OOC: Haven't read it, but support. Sapient is a silly word.

OOC: It's not a silly word but anyway. This one should be repealed when a replacement is ready to be submited.

[Simone Republic]

OOC: Haven't read it, but support. Sapient is a silly word.

OOC: It's not a silly word but anyway. This one should be repealed when a replacement is ready to be submited.

"Opposed, due to the apparent lack of a replacement draft." - Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia

Proposed replacement:
viewtopic.php?ns=1&f=9&t=539064

[Simone Republic]

OOC: Haven't read it, but support. Sapient is a silly word.

The replacement uses "intelligent lifeforms" but for compatibility reasons, defines that for the purpose of WA committees, anything deemed an intelligent lifeform must also be deemed a "sapient species". This is due to the heavy use of the word "sapient species" in other resolutions.

(IC)

As far as I am aware, there had only been three types of species: some kind of humanoids, some kind of androids/robots/AI, and bears from Bears Armed (it's not even canon if Simone Republic is a nation of bears or actually just a furry fandom convention). So the sapient bit should be OK as long as no one invents something truly weird.

(IC)

Bump. The Simone Republic barbecue of species now include dinosaurs and dodos from across the multiverse! Available NOW at the Strangers' Bar!

[Simone Republic]

*Bump*

[Imperium Anglorum]

OOC. I agree with Gruen/Hannasea: sapient is a silly word and I support repeal.

[Simone Republic]

OOC. I agree with Gruen/Hannasea: sapient is a silly word and I support repeal.

My replacement uses the term "intelligent lifeform" which hopefully is both more scientifically accurate (as far as it pertains to extraterrestrial forms of life).

There had been some minor wording changes for grammar and spelling.

Draft 2 below.

The World Assembly (WA),

Applauds the intention of GAR#355 to protect the interests of all sapient species, regardless of whether such species are human or otherwise, reflecting the diversity of species across the multiverse;

Concerned however that the target has significant flaws that neuter its ability to protect the rights of sapient species:

(1) the lack of a definition of what constitutes a "normal" human being in paragraph 8 of the resolution, thus granting broad discretion to member states to interpret this clause at their will, and potentially denying the rights of being sapient species in a WA member to those deemed not "normal";

(2) the definition of what constitutes "mentally ill" in paragraph 6 is left undefined and, again, open to malicious interpretation in the absence of any WA resolutions to the contrary;

(3) the same paragraph, by virtue of applying to individuals rather than species, also gives member states broad discretion to deny status as a sapient being to an individual in an otherwise-sapient species based on factors such as that individual's intelligence, ironically harming the rights of sapient species;

Looking forward to a replacement that rectifies such defects;

Hereby repeals GA#355, Rights of Sapient Species.

Draft 1 below.

The World Assembly,

Applauds the intention of GAR#355 to protect the interests of all sapient species across the multiverse of World Assembly members, regardless of whether such species are human or otherwise, taking into account the diversity of sapient species across the multiverse;

Concerned however that the said resolution has flaws that render it ineffective in protecting the rights of sapient species:

(1) the lack of a definition of what constitutes a "normal" human being in paragraph 8 of the resolution, thus granting broad discretion to member states to interpret this clause at their will and potentially denying the rights of being sapient species in a World Assembly member to those deemed not "normal";

(2) the definition of what constitutes "mentally ill" in paragraph six is left undefined and thus therefore subject, again, to the discretion of the member states in the absence of any World Assembly resolutions to the contrary;

(3) the same paragraph, by virtue of applying to individuals rather than species, also gives member states broad discretion to deny status as a sapient being to an individual in an otherwise-sapient species based on factors such as that individual's intelligence, ironically harming the rights of sapient species;

Looking forward to a potential replacement resolution that addresses such defects;

Hereby repeals GA#355, Rights of Sapient Species.

[Simone Republic]

Draft 3 has been published following a legality challenge which I decided not to contest and instead to amend the proposal.

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=540090

[The Ice States]

those deemed not "normal";

I would say that changing "those" to "individuals" would help make this issue clearer -- it would also somewhat incorporate the now-removed Argument 3.

In any case, my support due to these flaws and the target's author remains.

[Simone Republic]

Bump. I am not the only person drafting the replacement so it's open as to what the replacement will look like.

[Simone Republic]

those deemed not "normal";

I would say that changing "those" to "individuals" would help make this issue clearer -- it would also somewhat incorporate the now-removed Argument 3.

In any case, my support due to these flaws and the target's author remains.

This was changed in case you haven't noticed.

OOC: Haven't read it, but support. Sapient is a silly word.

OOC: It's not a silly word but anyway. This one should be repealed when a replacement is ready to be submited.

Note that I am not necessarily offering my replacement draft as the only replacement - I am open to there being another replacement. But this resolution seems to do more harm than good as it stands and we might as well get it off the books first. There's enough civil rights protection on the books.

OOC. I agree with Gruen/Hannasea: sapient is a silly word and I support repeal.

My main concern is actually that there's been so many resolutions using the term "sapient species" that we are gonna be stuck with having to define this term no matter what.

Last call

Anyway, bump and last call (and my last calls are like last call drinks at a bar, they can last awhile, bad pun intended)

Argument 2 is now "the lack of a definition of what constitutes "mentally ill" in paragraph 6 in this resolution, and thus open to varying and potentially malicious interpretation in the absence of any WA resolutions to the contrary"

This is on the assumption that Legality Challenge will be ruled out.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=540090

Also, there is an additional line:

Noting that the World Assembly already has numerous resolutions in place that protect the rights of sapient species;

Personally, probably more important to get this off the books of the GA first, because there are enough human rights/sapient species rights resolutions at hand that we can survive without this one for awhile.

[Terra Magnifica Gloria]

“Approved, but then I am going to vote against the replacement so that aliens don’t have rights”

[Simone Republic]

Bump as this has been around for a long while. We'll hammer out the replacement later, but that replacement remains pending as I am not 100% sure if my approach is correct.

[Simone Republic]

Bump. The Simone Republic bumper is now available in multiple colours!

Also last call.

[Wallenburg]

potentially denying the rights of being sapient species in a WA member state to individuals deemed not "normal,"

This is plainly untrue. I don't suggest including this claim.

[Simone Republic]

Preceding draft

The World Assembly (WA),

Applauds the intention of GAR#355 to protect the rights of all sapient species, reflecting the diversity of species across the multiverse;

Concerned however that the target has significant flaws that neuter its ability to protect the rights of sapient species:

(1) the lack of a definition of what constitutes a "normal" human being in paragraph 8 of the resolution, thus granting broad discretion to member states to interpret this clause at their will, and potentially denying the rights of being sapient species in a WA member to individuals deemed not "normal";

(2) the lack of a definition of what constitutes "mentally ill" in paragraph 6 in this resolution, and thus open to varying and potentially malicious interpretation in the absence of any WA resolutions to the contrary;

Noting that the World Assembly already has numerous resolutions in place that protect the rights of sapient species;

Looking forward to a replacement that rectifies such defects, if the WA deems this necessary;

Hereby repeals GA#355, Rights of Sapient Species.

potentially denying the rights of being sapient species in a WA member state to individuals deemed not "normal,"

This is plainly untrue. I don't suggest including this claim.

This has been removed. It now reads:

"normal" adult humans under paragraph 8 of the resolution, thus granting broad discretion to each WA state to interpret this clause at will

[Ignis Ferreus]

I support this but I'm kinda mad cuz I wanted to do the repeal for this and #354, any chance I can help out at the very least?

[The Overmind]

I support this but I'm kinda mad cuz I wanted to do the repeal for this and #354, any chance I can help out at the very least?

Simone Republic is replacing it. I don't really think it's a better replacement as it stands, but nonetheless, this is not the vaunted pro-human, anti-AI, anti-alien, move your repeal was meant to be.

[Simone Republic]

I support this but I'm kinda mad cuz I wanted to do the repeal for this and #354, any chance I can help out at the very least?

Simone Republic is replacing it. I don't really think it's a better replacement as it stands, but nonetheless, this is not the vaunted pro-human, anti-AI, anti-alien, move your repeal was meant to be.

Mind you, the sole reason I noticed this was because I was looking up text on protecting the mentally ill and came across the definition of sapient species (which effectively is relied upon in so many other resolutions) being badly defined in such a torridly dreadful way.

And yes, this came from March 2023.

[Wallenburg]

Preceding draft

The World Assembly (WA),

Applauds the intention of GAR#355 to protect the rights of all sapient species, reflecting the diversity of species across the multiverse;

Concerned however that the target has significant flaws that neuter its ability to protect the rights of sapient species:

(1) the lack of a definition of what constitutes a "normal" human being in paragraph 8 of the resolution, thus granting broad discretion to member states to interpret this clause at their will, and potentially denying the rights of being sapient species in a WA member to individuals deemed not "normal";

(2) the lack of a definition of what constitutes "mentally ill" in paragraph 6 in this resolution, and thus open to varying and potentially malicious interpretation in the absence of any WA resolutions to the contrary;

Noting that the World Assembly already has numerous resolutions in place that protect the rights of sapient species;

Looking forward to a replacement that rectifies such defects, if the WA deems this necessary;

Hereby repeals GA#355, Rights of Sapient Species.

This is plainly untrue. I don't suggest including this claim.

This has been removed. It now reads:

"normal" adult humans under paragraph 8 of the resolution, thus granting broad discretion to each WA state to interpret this clause at will

Legal now, albeit a very weak argument. When considering the relevant differences between humans and other animals, there are few such differences with appreciable variation within the human population, certainly not within any colorable interpretation of "normal".