NATION

PASSWORD

[DRAFT] The Ethical Killing of Animals

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Bakhton
Envoy
 
Posts: 245
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

[DRAFT] The Ethical Killing of Animals

Postby Bakhton » Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:35 pm

"This one won't be controversial at all!"

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Bakhton

The Ethical Killing of Animals

The World Assembly,

RECOGNIZING that many nations kill animals in order to clean, process, and cook their meat for the purpose of feeding their citizens,

APPLAUDING nations’ and this assembly’s commitment to end hunger in the impoverished areas of the world as well as its endeavor to provide healthy food for all people,

CONCERNED, however, that sentient animals are legally allowed to be killed in a manner that causes them extensive and unnecessarily elongated physical pain due to the lack of international standards,

BELIEVING all unnecessary physical pain, whether from sentient or sapient lifeforms, to be a matter worthy of prevention,

DEFINES for the purpose of this resolution:

a) ‘Sentient animals’ as species with the ability to experience sensations such as physical pain and the ability to physically react to said pain in an identifiable way,

b) ‘Cruelty’ as the act of exposing a sentient animal to physical pain for elongated and unnecessary lengths of time,

c) ‘Physical pain’ as the sensation felt by all sentient animals when exposed to physical harm damaging to their tissues or organs, internal or external, which causes intense feelings of discomfort,

MANDATES that in the legal killing of sentient animals for food, all sentient animals are to be killed in a manner avoiding cruelty and unnecessarily prolonged physical pain and that nations shall take necessary legal action against said entities that are not in compliance with these standards,

CLARIFIES that this resolution only addresses food processing industries and makes no comment on the killing of animals for religious or ritual purposes, animal testing, the right of a person to kill a sentient animal in self-defense, hunting practices, or the rights of microbial and plant life,

URGING member nations to pass more legislation to increase the ethical treatment of sentient animals.

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Bakhton

The Ethical Killing of Animals

RECOGNIZING that many nations kill animals in order to clean, process, and cook their meat for the purpose of feeding their citizens,

APPLAUDING nations’ and this assembly’s commitment to end hunger in the impoverished areas of the world as well as its endeavor to provide healthy food for all people,

CONCERNED, however, that sentient animals are legally allowed to be killed in a manner that causes them extensive and unnecessarily elongated physical pain,

BELIEVING all unnecessary physical pain, whether from sentient or sapient lifeforms, to be a matter worthy of prevention,

DEFINES for the purpose of this resolution:

a) ‘Sentient animals’ as species with the ability to experience sensations such as physical pain and the ability to physically react to said pain in an identifiable way,

b) ‘Cruelty’ as the act of exposing a sentient animal to physical pain for elongated and unnecessary lengths of time,

c) ‘Physical pain’ as the sensation felt by all sentient animals when exposed to physical harm damaging to their tissues or organs, internal or external, which causes intense feelings of discomfort,

MANDATES that in the legal killing of sentient animals for food, all sentient animals are to be killed in a manner avoiding cruelty and unnecessarily prolonged physical pain,

CLARIFIES that this resolution makes no comment on the killing of animals for religious or ritual purposes, animal testing, the right of a person to kill a sentient animal in self-defense, hunting practices, or the rights of microbial and plant life,

URGING member nations to pass more legislation to increase the ethical treatment of sentient animals.

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Bakhton

The Ethical Killing of Animals

RECOGNIZING that many nations kill animals in order to clean, process, and cook their meat for the purpose of feeding their citizens,

APPLAUDING nations’ and this assembly’s commitment to end hunger in the impoverished areas of the world as well as its endeavor to provide healthy food for all people,

CONCERNED, however, that sentient animals are legally allowed to be killed in a manner that causes them extensive and unnecessarily elongated physical pain,

BELIEVING all unnecessary physical pain, whether from sentient or sapient lifeforms, to be a matter worthy of legislation in order to prevent it,

DEFINES for the purpose of this resolution:

a) ‘Sentient animals’ as species with the ability to experience sensations such as physical pain and the ability to physically react to said pain in an identifiable way,

b) ‘Cruelty’ as the act of exposing a sentient animal to physical pain for elongated and unnecessary lengths of time,

c) ‘Physical pain’ as the sensation felt by all sentient animals when exposed to physical harm damaging to their tissues or organs, internal or external, which causes intense feelings of discomfort,

MANDATES that in the legal killing of sentient animals for food or hunting purposes, all sentient animals are to be killed in a manner avoiding cruelty and unnecessarily prolonged physical pain,

CLARIFIES that this resolution does not apply for religious sacrifices or rituals.
Last edited by Bakhton on Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:50 am, edited 9 times in total.
Sorta IntFed.
WA Voting Record
When your resolution fails.
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

User avatar
Tinfect
Senator
 
Posts: 3830
Founded: Jul 04, 2014
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Tinfect » Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:22 pm

Bakhton wrote:CLARIFIES that this resolution does not apply for religious sacrifices or rituals.


Markhov enters the room wearing a Mitre, carrying a staff, upon which sat a small golden statuette of a cooked chicken. "Congratulations Ambassador, a new Religion has been established, calling themselves 'Food Processing'."

Markhov remains as such for a brief moment, before swapping the mitre off for his usual cap, and continuing, "In case this was unclear, the final clause effectively nullifies the draft."
Last edited by Tinfect on Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Diplomatic Overseer Alexander Markhov
Acquired Titles:
Knighted, by Imperium Anglorum



Imperium Central News Network: Diplomatic Oversight deploys representative to foreign nation, authorities declined to provide purpose of mission | 13th Legion reports full combat readiness, deployed to Exterior Territories on as-yet unknown mission, | Civil Oversight backing down on economic policy alterations, delays next phase of plan by four Standard Years | Balder Orbit transit unrestricted, TIV - Fractal Eye removed from orbit | Indomitable Bastard #283

Nation stats have no power here!

User avatar
Aclion
Diplomat
 
Posts: 701
Founded: Apr 12, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Aclion » Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:55 pm

Celice watches the flagrant violation of GA#2 with interest.
World Assembly Delegate: Celice Leclère
Oatland Cartographer, Delegate and regular Chief Administrator
Author of Oatland's Articles of Confederation
Economic Left/Right: 4.0
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.46
Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson

User avatar
Bakhton
Envoy
 
Posts: 245
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bakhton » Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:00 pm

Aclion wrote:Celice watches the flagrant violation of GA#2 with interest.

OOC: Which section?
#2 Rights and Duties of WA States
Description: World Assembly membership in NationStates is a choice, not a requirement. Those of us who chose to participate have certain responsibilities to ourselves, each other, and the entire NationStates community. At the same time, we as NationStates have certain rights and responsibilities that we do not willingly relinquish when we chose to join the World Assembly.
It is therefore vital to clearly delineate what constitutes sovereign law versus international law passed by this World Assembly. This document will attempt to enumerate those most basic of rights, as they exist within and as defined by the World Assembly of NationStates.
A Declaration on Rights and Duties of WA States:
Section I:
The Principle of National Sovereignty:
Article 1 § Every WA Member State has the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, without dictation by any other NationState, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of government.
Article 2 § Every WA Member State has the right to exercise jurisdiction over its territory and over all persons and things therein, subject to the immunities recognized by international law.
Article 3 § Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState, subject to the immunities recognized by international law.
Section II:
Rights and Duties in War:
Article 4 § Every WA Member State has the right of individual or collective self-defense against armed attack.
Article 5 § War in the World of NationStates is defined as a consensual act between two or more NationStates. WA Member States may, at their discretion, intercede against declarations of war on behalf of NationStates who wish to avoid war.
Article 6 § Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from fomenting civil strife in the territory of another NationState, and to prevent the organization within its territory of activities calculated to foment such civil strife.
Article 7 § Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from giving assistance to any NationState which is acting in violation of Article 5 or 6. Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from recognizing any territorial acquisition by another NationState acting in violation of Article 5 or 6.
Section III:
The Role of the World Assembly:
Article 8 § Every WA Member State has the right to equality in law with every other WA Member State.
Article 9 § Every WA Member State has the duty to carry out in good faith its obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law, including this World Assembly, and it may not invoke provisions in its constitution or its laws as an excuse for failure to perform this duty.
Article 10 § Whilst WA Member States may engage in wars, the World Assembly as a body maintains neutrality in matters of civil and international strife. As such, the WA will not engage in commanding, organising, ratifying, denouncing, or otherwise participating in armed conflicts, police actions, or military activities under the WA banner.
Article 11 § Every WA Member State has the duty to conduct its relations with other NationStates in accordance with international law and with the principle that the sovereignty of each WA Member State is subject to the supremacy of international law.
Sorta IntFed.
WA Voting Record
When your resolution fails.
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

User avatar
Bakhton
Envoy
 
Posts: 245
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bakhton » Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:02 pm

Tinfect wrote:
Bakhton wrote:CLARIFIES that this resolution does not apply for religious sacrifices or rituals.


Markhov enters the room wearing a Mitre, carrying a staff, upon which sat a small golden statuette of a cooked chicken. "Congratulations Ambassador, a new Religion has been established, calling themselves 'Food Processing'."

Markhov remains as such for a brief moment, before swapping the mitre off for his usual cap, and continuing, "In case this was unclear, the final clause effectively nullifies the draft."

Lara raises her hands, "Would you prefer I add 'and that no such institution may be created for the sole purpose of violating this exception'?"
Sorta IntFed.
WA Voting Record
When your resolution fails.
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

User avatar
Aclion
Diplomat
 
Posts: 701
Founded: Apr 12, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Aclion » Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:10 pm

Bakhton wrote:
Aclion wrote:Celice watches the flagrant violation of GA#2 with interest.

OOC: Which section?

OOC: referring to Tinfect article nine

Bakhton wrote:Lara raises her hands, "Would you prefer I add 'and that no such institution may be created for the sole purpose of violating this exception'?"

bona fide religious purposes has a nice ring to it.
Last edited by Aclion on Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
World Assembly Delegate: Celice Leclère
Oatland Cartographer, Delegate and regular Chief Administrator
Author of Oatland's Articles of Confederation
Economic Left/Right: 4.0
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.46
Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson

User avatar
Bakhton
Envoy
 
Posts: 245
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bakhton » Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:17 pm

Aclion wrote:bona fide religious purposes has a nice ring to it.

Lara gestures at Aclion's ambassador with her pen, nodding. "I may actually add that, in more boring terms of course."
Sorta IntFed.
WA Voting Record
When your resolution fails.
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

User avatar
Tinfect
Senator
 
Posts: 3830
Founded: Jul 04, 2014
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Tinfect » Sun Jan 08, 2017 11:53 pm

Bakhton wrote:Lara raises her hands, "Would you prefer I add 'and that no such institution may be created for the sole purpose of violating this exception'?"


"No, Ambassador," starts Markhov, bashing the end of the staff against the floor, resulting in the golden statuette falling off and revealing itself as mere plastic, "There have been quite extensive debates regarding why the World Assembly may not be qualified to determine the validity of religious belief. My concern is that it would prevent the recognition of emergent beliefs with such as a tenet."
Last edited by Tinfect on Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Diplomatic Overseer Alexander Markhov
Acquired Titles:
Knighted, by Imperium Anglorum



Imperium Central News Network: Diplomatic Oversight deploys representative to foreign nation, authorities declined to provide purpose of mission | 13th Legion reports full combat readiness, deployed to Exterior Territories on as-yet unknown mission, | Civil Oversight backing down on economic policy alterations, delays next phase of plan by four Standard Years | Balder Orbit transit unrestricted, TIV - Fractal Eye removed from orbit | Indomitable Bastard #283

Nation stats have no power here!

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15593
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Wallenburg » Sun Jan 08, 2017 11:59 pm

"Due to several previous mediocre resolutions attempting to address this issue, we are almost categorically opposed to any legislation on animal abuse. Given the ambiguity of your definitions and your special exemptions for religious reasons, I see no reason to make an exception. We are opposed."
DEFINITELY THE OFFICIAL WALLENBURGIAN ANTHEM THIS TIME
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Tinfect
Senator
 
Posts: 3830
Founded: Jul 04, 2014
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Tinfect » Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:04 am

Wallenburg wrote:"Due to several previous mediocre resolutions attempting to address this issue, we are almost categorically opposed to any legislation on animal abuse. Given the ambiguity of your definitions and your special exemptions for religious reasons, I see no reason to make an exception. We are opposed."


Markhov points the staff at the Wallenburgian delegation, notices that the topper has fallen off, and casts it aside, "We wish to note that the Imperium is in agreement for the exact reasons stated by the delegation of Wallenburg. We see little reason to support this draft in any form; my questioning of the conclusion of the draft is merely one as to your intent."
Diplomatic Overseer Alexander Markhov
Acquired Titles:
Knighted, by Imperium Anglorum



Imperium Central News Network: Diplomatic Oversight deploys representative to foreign nation, authorities declined to provide purpose of mission | 13th Legion reports full combat readiness, deployed to Exterior Territories on as-yet unknown mission, | Civil Oversight backing down on economic policy alterations, delays next phase of plan by four Standard Years | Balder Orbit transit unrestricted, TIV - Fractal Eye removed from orbit | Indomitable Bastard #283

Nation stats have no power here!

User avatar
Bakhton
Envoy
 
Posts: 245
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bakhton » Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:28 am

Wallenburg wrote:"Due to several previous mediocre resolutions attempting to address this issue, we are almost categorically opposed to any legislation on animal abuse. Given the ambiguity of your definitions and your special exemptions for religious reasons, I see no reason to make an exception. We are opposed."

"I'm confused, what does past failed legislation have to do with the quality of this one? Do you believe a such a project could not work?"
Markhov points the staff at the Wallenburgian delegation, notices that the topper has fallen off, and casts it aside, "We wish to note that the Imperium is in agreement for the exact reasons stated by the delegation of Wallenburg. We see little reason to support this draft in any form; my questioning of the conclusion of the draft is merely one as to your intent."

"The intent of the exemption clause was to allow for religious freedom as that had been a point of contention in previous repeals of similar resolutions."
Last edited by Bakhton on Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sorta IntFed.
WA Voting Record
When your resolution fails.
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15593
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Wallenburg » Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:31 am

Bakhton wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"Due to several previous mediocre resolutions attempting to address this issue, we are almost categorically opposed to any legislation on animal abuse. Given the ambiguity of your definitions and your special exemptions for religious reasons, I see no reason to make an exception. We are opposed."

"I'm confused, what does past failed legislation have to do with the quality of this one? Do you believe a such a project could not work?"

"Failures to adequately address this topic in the past indicate that it cannot be done at all, or at least that it is extremely difficult to achieve. Your proposal fails to stand out as an exception. It doesn't have all the same drawbacks as previous attempts, but it still suffers from significant problems that could either remain objectionable or transform into new problems."
Last edited by Wallenburg on Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
DEFINITELY THE OFFICIAL WALLENBURGIAN ANTHEM THIS TIME
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Bakhton
Envoy
 
Posts: 245
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bakhton » Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:35 am

Wallenburg wrote:"Failures to adequately address this topic in the past indicate that it cannot be done at all, or at least that it is extremely difficult to achieve. Your proposal fails to stand out as an exception. It doesn't have all the same drawbacks as previous attempts, but it still suffers from significant problems that could either remain objectionable or transform into new problems."

"What would help this stand out? If you could describe these objectionable ideas or new problems at some point, that would be greatly helpful for the drafting process. For brevity, would you say these things are largely present and pointed out in repeals of previous attempts?"
Sorta IntFed.
WA Voting Record
When your resolution fails.
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15593
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Wallenburg » Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:47 am

Bakhton wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"Failures to adequately address this topic in the past indicate that it cannot be done at all, or at least that it is extremely difficult to achieve. Your proposal fails to stand out as an exception. It doesn't have all the same drawbacks as previous attempts, but it still suffers from significant problems that could either remain objectionable or transform into new problems."

"What would help this stand out? If you could describe these objectionable ideas or new problems at some point, that would be greatly helpful for the drafting process. For brevity, would you say these things are largely present and pointed out in repeals of previous attempts?"

"Indeed, the issues of previous attempts have been well documented in repeal efforts, such as this one and this one. Generally, our previous objections have centered upon clauses that set the rights of animals above those of sapient beings. At the moment, your clauses are ambiguous and hazy. We hope that they will not develop into the same kind of mandates that we have seen before."
DEFINITELY THE OFFICIAL WALLENBURGIAN ANTHEM THIS TIME
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Bakhton
Envoy
 
Posts: 245
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bakhton » Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:51 am

Wallenburg wrote:
Bakhton wrote:"What would help this stand out? If you could describe these objectionable ideas or new problems at some point, that would be greatly helpful for the drafting process. For brevity, would you say these things are largely present and pointed out in repeals of previous attempts?"

"Indeed, the issues of previous attempts have been well documented in repeal efforts, such as this one and this one. Generally, our previous objections have centered upon clauses that set the rights of animals above those of sapient beings. At the moment, your clauses are ambiguous and hazy. We hope that they will not develop into the same kind of mandates that we have seen before."

"We assure you Ambassador, that in future drafts and revisions our staff will take every step necessary to not repeat the mistakes of the past."

Staff information on these repeals:
1. Sapient rights first.
2. No moralizing.
3. Stated no stance on religious sacrifice.
4. Allow self-defense.
5. Clarify no protection of small microbial organisms or plants.
6. Affirm the right of hunters to cull species.
7. Allow animal testing.
Last edited by Bakhton on Mon Jan 09, 2017 1:08 am, edited 3 times in total.
Sorta IntFed.
WA Voting Record
When your resolution fails.
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

User avatar
Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 12
Founded: Apr 30, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem » Mon Jan 09, 2017 1:45 am

"This legislation lacks detailed clarification over 'religious rituals' and 'unnecesary cruelty'. In current state this legislation can be widely abused not only by individual nations but also by world assembly itself. Regulation should be clear so blood in nations economies(corporations) won't have problems with interpreting it. Also world assembly should be secular organisation which works for the good of the people. Religion shouldn't dictate what is legal and what is not therfore we demand clarification."

User avatar
Bakhton
Envoy
 
Posts: 245
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bakhton » Mon Jan 09, 2017 5:13 am

Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem wrote:"This legislation lacks detailed clarification over 'religious rituals' and 'unnecesary cruelty'. In current state this legislation can be widely abused not only by individual nations but also by world assembly itself. Regulation should be clear so blood in nations economies(corporations) won't have problems with interpreting it. Also world assembly should be secular organisation which works for the good of the people. Religion shouldn't dictate what is legal and what is not therfore we demand clarification."

"In future drafts it will assert no opinion on religious rituals, prohibiting or allowing, leaving it to the nation to decide."
Sorta IntFed.
WA Voting Record
When your resolution fails.
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

User avatar
Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 12
Founded: Apr 30, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem » Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:50 am

Bakhton wrote:
Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem wrote:"This legislation lacks detailed clarification over 'religious rituals' and 'unnecesary cruelty'. In current state this legislation can be widely abused not only by individual nations but also by world assembly itself. Regulation should be clear so blood in nations economies(corporations) won't have problems with interpreting it. Also world assembly should be secular organisation which works for the good of the people. Religion shouldn't dictate what is legal and what is not therfore we demand clarification."

"In future drafts it will assert no opinion on religious rituals, prohibiting or allowing, leaving it to the nation to decide."

"If nation is freely able to interpret this law however they want, this law is completely irrelevant and will never work. Now I can say that 'I won't accept this law because my religion isn't allowing it' and therefore I can completly ignore WA legislation just because I want."

User avatar
Bakhton
Envoy
 
Posts: 245
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bakhton » Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:00 am

Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem wrote:
Bakhton wrote:"In future drafts it will assert no opinion on religious rituals, prohibiting or allowing, leaving it to the nation to decide."

"If nation is freely able to interpret this law however they want, this law is completely irrelevant and will never work. Now I can say that 'I won't accept this law because my religion isn't allowing it' and therefore I can completly ignore WA legislation just because I want."

"This exception won't be in future drafts."
Sorta IntFed.
WA Voting Record
When your resolution fails.
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 10520
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:00 am

Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem wrote:
Bakhton wrote:"In future drafts it will assert no opinion on religious rituals, prohibiting or allowing, leaving it to the nation to decide."

"If nation is freely able to interpret this law however they want, this law is completely irrelevant and will never work. Now I can say that 'I won't accept this law because my religion isn't allowing it' and therefore I can completly ignore WA legislation just because I want."

"Nations are bound to good faith interpretations. You can't interpret it any way, merely in a reasonable way."
From the desk of: Ambassador Benjamin Bell, C.D.S.P.
Ideological Bulwark #274

Bell.Benjamin.CDSP@gmail.com
Office # 13, Floor 3 of the WAHQ, next to the Women's Restroom
The Email is real! Send me a message!


Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 34 of the Internet are a bad thing to mix up.

User avatar
Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 12
Founded: Apr 30, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem » Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:06 am

Bakhton wrote:
Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem wrote:"If nation is freely able to interpret this law however they want, this law is completely irrelevant and will never work. Now I can say that 'I won't accept this law because my religion isn't allowing it' and therefore I can completly ignore WA legislation just because I want."

"This exception won't be in future drafts."

"Yes but it stands in this draft, and in this legislature therfore it is not fully clear. Legislature shouldn't be open for so much interpretation, it is difficult to predict outcomes in this manner."
Last edited by Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem on Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 12
Founded: Apr 30, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem » Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:09 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem wrote:"If nation is freely able to interpret this law however they want, this law is completely irrelevant and will never work. Now I can say that 'I won't accept this law because my religion isn't allowing it' and therefore I can completly ignore WA legislation just because I want."

"Nations are bound to good faith interpretations. You can't interpret it any way, merely in a reasonable way."

"But in current state it is easy to misinterpret it and use it for own good, instead for the good of the people."

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 10520
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:11 am

Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:"Nations are bound to good faith interpretations. You can't interpret it any way, merely in a reasonable way."

"But in current state it is easy to misinterpret it and use it for own good, instead for the good of the people."

"The term good-faith is pretty inclusive. Its hard to interpret a resolution banning the ethical killing of animals to, in good faith, include skinning them alive just because a nation claims that they believe that to be the most humane method. Good Faith is an objective, not a subjective, standard. There is less room to wiggle than you think, and most authors craft their resolutions in such a way as to limit that."
From the desk of: Ambassador Benjamin Bell, C.D.S.P.
Ideological Bulwark #274

Bell.Benjamin.CDSP@gmail.com
Office # 13, Floor 3 of the WAHQ, next to the Women's Restroom
The Email is real! Send me a message!


Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 34 of the Internet are a bad thing to mix up.

User avatar
Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 12
Founded: Apr 30, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem » Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:06 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem wrote:"But in current state it is easy to misinterpret it and use it for own good, instead for the good of the people."

"The term good-faith is pretty inclusive. Its hard to interpret a resolution banning the ethical killing of animals to, in good faith, include skinning them alive just because a nation claims that they believe that to be the most humane method. Good Faith is an objective, not a subjective, standard. There is less room to wiggle than you think, and most authors craft their resolutions in such a way as to limit that."

"But there have to be formed a list of ethical methods for religious rituals which will limit this "religious priviledges". But in the same time this will need addictional councils and more bureaucracy which will have greater impact on budget."

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 10520
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:08 am

Uocati et Regni Prosperitatem wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:"The term good-faith is pretty inclusive. Its hard to interpret a resolution banning the ethical killing of animals to, in good faith, include skinning them alive just because a nation claims that they believe that to be the most humane method. Good Faith is an objective, not a subjective, standard. There is less room to wiggle than you think, and most authors craft their resolutions in such a way as to limit that."

"But there have to be formed a list of ethical methods for religious rituals which will limit this "religious priviledges". But in the same time this will need addictional councils and more bureaucracy which will have greater impact on budget."

"Bureaucracy happens. You don't like it, then maybe the WA isn't for you. Why should religious services get the opportunity to harm animals, exactly? What makes believing in a make-believe story so worthy of protection? Near as I can tell, there is no reason to allow a religious exception."
From the desk of: Ambassador Benjamin Bell, C.D.S.P.
Ideological Bulwark #274

Bell.Benjamin.CDSP@gmail.com
Office # 13, Floor 3 of the WAHQ, next to the Women's Restroom
The Email is real! Send me a message!


Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 34 of the Internet are a bad thing to mix up.

Next

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Sciongrad, Sierra Lyricalia, Tailte na tine

Remove ads