|
 |
|
|
|
Repeal "Scientific Freedom"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution
Category: Repeal
Resolution: #2
Proposed by: Jey
Description: UN Resolution #2: Scientific Freedom (Category: Free Trade; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.
Argument: The General Assembly of the United Nations,
COMMENDING Resolution #2 for its intent to bring forth increased freedoms,
CONSIDERING that simply stating that a country "has long stood for Scientific Freedom", as seen in this resolution, does not require anything of UN Members, nor does it urge UN Members to bring forth initiatives or commissions to promote Scientific Freedom,
ALSO CONSIDERING that Resolution #2 neither lists a clear definition or explanation as to what constitutes Scientific Freedom, nor does it provide any clear framework or plans to bring about its cause,
CONCERNED that this resolution overlooks the harmful effects of unrestricted Scientific Freedom, which would lead to numerous painful, deadly, unsafe, and unethical scientific practices being forcibly legal in all UN Member nations,
CONCLUDING that Resolution #2 does not meet the desirable standards of UN resolutions for its disregard for potentially harmful and unjustifiable scientific practices and failure to provide any clear structure in bringing about necessary Scientific Freedom,
UNDERSTANDING that the freedom of safe and ethical scientific practices should be protected for numerous purposes,
REPEALS Resolution #2: Scientific Freedom.
Votes For: 2,598
Votes Against: 3,020
[Delegate Votes]
Voting Ends: Wed Apr 5 2006
Legalese's position: Undecided [Vote For] [Vote Against] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
, |
 |
|
|
|
|
As the Free Republic sees nothing better than Resolution # 2 currently on the table, we shall ABSTAIN from this particular vote. |
 |
 |
|
Lamoni |
|
Democratic Maniac |
 |
|
|
|
Posts: 1952 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
, |
|
|
|
, |
|
|
|
|
You bunch of fence-sitting fairies. 
In all seriousness though, the original resolution is one of these early crap one-line jobs (if you discount all the signatory gubbins at the end) and so deserves to be repealed so a slightly better worded resolution can take its place if required (or if anyone can be bothered to write one). |
|
|
 |
|
Bettia |
|
We don't do defence |
|
|
|
|
|
Posts: 956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
, |
|
|
|
|
| QUOTE (Bettia @ Apr 3 2006, 02:32 PM) | You bunch of fence-sitting fairies.
In all seriousness though, the original resolution is one of these early crap one-line jobs (if you discount all the signatory gubbins at the end) and so deserves to be repealed so a slightly better worded resolution can take its place if required (or if anyone can be bothered to write one). |
So, for this to be a non-meh resolution it should have a paragraph about paving the way for something better to be put in its place.
Now give me my wings and little tiara back, fence-sitting fairies need to look their best, you know. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
, |
|
|
|
, |
|
|
|
|
|
Why should this be repealed? Scientific freedom is a good thing, and should be encouraged. Absent any sort of resolution of this type, progress could stop. And that's bad. So, frankly, unless there is something better than Resolution 2 up for vote, or something in whatever repeals it (can you repeal and replace, or at least amend a resolution?) why should it be repealed? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
, |
|
|
|
|
with a 1-2-2 result, the vote is split between voting NO, and ABSTAINING from voting.
Given those options, Ms. Cappaverde shall cast her deciding vote shortly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
, |
|
|
|
|
Upon considering the proposed repeal, AO Delegate to the UN Vanessa Cappaverde issued the following statment:
| QUOTE |
Ladies and Gentlemen, and Fellow Delegates from Atlantian Oceania:
In looking at this resolution, one must look at what it aims to accomplish, and to determine if this is the best course for us to take. In this case, its aim is clear: to remove from the books a poorly-worded resolution, making way for a better option to accomplish the positive goals the intial resolution undertook, but failed in doing so.
As it stands, the current "Scientific Freedom" resolution is worthy in its attempts to promote scientific and technological development across the world, however, it is done in an unclear form, which could actually serve as a detriment to the community, by setting no guidelines, and pushing the belief of the submitter, rather than a clear vision of how scientific development can be used peacefully by the body. Under the current rules and guidelines of the UN, this resolution, had it been presented today, would never had made the floor for a vote, and probably had been ruled as out of order.
Using my position as the delegate to break a tie on the motion, my options are to either vote against the repeal, or to abstain from voting all together. If I were to make the vote on behalf of the Legalese delegation alone, I would be voting to repeal this resolution, making the way for a replacement that is reflective of the current atmosphere.
Therefore, given the options offered, I shall abstain from voting.
Yours,
Vanessa Cappaverde
Regional Delegate to the United Nations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
, |
|
Track this topic
Receive email notification when a reply has been made to this topic and you are not active on the board.
Subscribe to this forum
Receive email notification when a new topic is posted in this forum and you are not active on the board.
Download / Print this Topic
Download this topic in different formats or view a printer friendly version.
[ Script Execution time: 0.0147 ] [ 15 queries used ] [ GZIP Enabled ]
|
Close Topic Options
