Start new topic
RESOLUTION: Repeal "Rights of Minorities and Women
 
Support? Or no support?
Yes, me say repeal good [ 3 ]  [42.86%]
No, me say repeal bad [ 3 ]  [42.86%]
Abstain, me say meh. [ 1 ]  [14.29%]
Total Votes: 7
Guests cannot vote 
Posted on Nov 15 2007, 04:07 AM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
Repeal "Rights of Minorities and Women"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal
Resolution: #80
Proposed by: G l o g

Description: UN Resolution #80: Rights of Minorities and Women (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: UN Law "Rights of Minorities and Women" BAD!!!

Article I say "No one race or culture is better than another." What mean "better"? UN law not tell what "better" mean. This not protect any rights.

Article II say "Males and Females should be treated as equals. Whether it be in the workplace or at home". What mean "equals"? UN law not tell what "equal" mean. This not protect any rights.

Article III say "Not a single religion or belief is better or more right than another." This not tell what "better" mean either. Not tell what "right" mean. This not protect any rights.

Article IV say: "One should have the right to express their love for a member of the same sex." What "express their love" mean? UN law not say. This not protect any rights.

UN law use word "should" too much. Not strong word.

UN law not protect rights of minorities. Only mention "race" once in preamble part. Mention "race or culture" in Article I. Never mention again.

UN law not protect rights of women. Only say "should be treated as equals" in Article II. Never mention again.

UN law "Discrimination Accord" protect some rights. "Discrimination Accord" GOOD!!! "Discrimination Accord" still protect rights after this repealed. "Rights of Minorities and Women" not protect any rights.

UN Law "Rights of Minorities and Women" do nothing, just happy words to make UN people feel good. Stand in way of new law that protect rights.

UN Law "Rights of Minorities and Women" BAD!!! UN repeal.

Votes For: 100

Votes Against: 57

[Delegate Votes]

Voting Ends: Mon Nov 19 2007

Bettia
We don't do defence
******
Posts: 956
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooTop

,
Posted on Nov 15 2007, 04:14 AM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
Cavemen writing UN resolutions? Whatever next? biggrin.gif

Whilst the original resolution is very simplistic and fails to elaborate on any of its points, does it really need repealing? The first three articles seem okay for a bunch of PC balnket statements, but the fourth one could be seen as an attempt to impose a law on member state regardless of their religious views, which seems to contradict the statement of article 3 which says no religion is better or more right than another.

For that reason, the Bettian delegate says REPEAL AWAY.
Bettia
We don't do defence
******
Posts: 956
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooTop

,
Posted on Nov 15 2007, 06:28 AM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
Me agree UN Law "Rights of Minorities and Women" BAD!!! Us repeal.

Ug.
Starblaydia
Also available in purple
********
Posts: 1877
Quote Post
 
MSNTop

,
Posted on Nov 15 2007, 04:08 PM
PMEmail Poster
 
I actually don't have a problem with the Resolution, which encourages equal treatment (a concept I strongly agree with) without being overly (if at all) Legislative. I also disagree with the Bettian delegate's view on the final article in the resolution, as it's worded to not force member states to do anything (hence the word "should" in the article). I'd agree that this resolution has no real legal teeth to it, though I also have no problem with the UN agreeing on encouraged policy at times, as this resolution does.

As for the wording of the repeal itself, I have a hard time taking it seriously (though I concede this is probably done for IC reasons, like the Jey/BoF incident). Furthermore, the argument made by the Glogian delegate appears to be that the resolution is not strong enough, a case I don't entirely disagree with. However, this repeal won't necessarily be productive in that order (and I'm not sure is necessary, as tougher legislation wouldn't necessarily cause a deletion by contradiction, IMO).

The delegate from the Legal Republic (seems weird to have to wear two different hats with one user name, I must say) votes AGAINST the Repeal
Legalese
Back in Black
****
Posts: 431
Quote Post
 
AOLTop

,
Posted on Nov 16 2007, 05:54 AM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
UN Law "Rights of Minorities and Women" GOOD!!! UN keep.

biggrin.gif
Lamoni
Democratic Maniac
********
Posts: 1952
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooMSNTop

,
Posted on Nov 18 2007, 02:48 PM
PMEmail Poster
 
While I believe we should have a RoMaW that is stronger, I cannot accept the repeal resolution as it is. Therefore, Vista Buena recommends that we should vote against the repeal. We cannot have these cavemen disrespecting the UN.
Vista Buena
Inexperienced
*
Posts: 12
Quote Post
 
Top

,
Posted on Nov 19 2007, 05:25 AM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
Well, the voting's over and the scores are tied at 3-3-1. Therefore, by the powers vested in me as the UN delegate, the Bettian representitive has made the decision to take the coward's way out and abstain from voting.

With the votes currently standing at 5,029 for and 4,189 against, it looks like the AYES may just have it, bar a late comeback from the nay-sayers.
Bettia
We don't do defence
******
Posts: 956
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooTop

,
Posted on Nov 19 2007, 02:39 PM
PMEmail Poster
 
The primitive delegation from the Backward peoples of Tempalhiyon are pleased to see the abstention.

(guess who abstained?)
Allemenschen
Royal Scribe
***
Posts: 116
Quote Post
 
YahooTop

,
Posted on Nov 19 2007, 09:29 PM
PMEmail Poster
 
We are dismayed to see this putrid, primitive resolution being passed. The resolution is completely lacking in grammar and proper word usage. The language of this resolution is so incompatible with our nation's education standards that any students who attempted to write like this in our examinations would never be able to graduate.
Vista Buena
Inexperienced
*
Posts: 12
Quote Post
 
Top

,
Posted on Nov 20 2007, 05:31 AM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
Personally the Bettian delegate doesn't see what the problem is. So cavemen don't speak perfect Queen's english - big deal. We would urge the Vista Buena representative to reconsider their hasty decision to leave the UN.

Besides, this wasn't a proper resolution per se, just a repeal of a oversimplistic resolution for which a more effective replacement is currently being redrafted in the UN section of the NS forum.
Bettia
We don't do defence
******
Posts: 956
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooTop

,

Topic OptionsReply to this topicMake a quick replyStart new topic

 



[ Script Execution time: 0.0210 ]   [ 16 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]

-->