Nationstates - World Assembly Proposals

Moderator: Goatkiller666

User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Nationstates - World Assembly Proposals

Post by Avatar »

Current WA Proposal
On the Rights of Nomads

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Urgench

Description: This resolution recognises that nations have Nomadic populations who may have been deprived of their basic rights. It also recognises that aspects of a nomadic lifestyle may cause controversy among settled societies. This resolution restores basic rights and access to public services to nomadic communities who have been deprived of them; it will encourage better communication between settled and nomadic communities with the object of creating greater social harmony.This resolution also accepts that with these rights come responsibilities.

For the purposes of this resolution Nomadism will be defined as any lifestyle or way of living which in an organised and/or traditional manner is not settled in one place, either part or all of the time. Lifestyles which require peripatesis to find resources or to husband animal herds, follow animal migrations or the seasons are also defined as Nomadic.

The World Assembly:

1. Requires that its Member Nations not discriminate against persons on the basis of their following a nomadic lifestyle or those who identify themselves as ethnically nomadic. Member nations must introduce laws to prevent discrimination against Nomads in the provision of goods and services, and private sector employment practices.

2. Requires that its Member Nations not institute policies of forced settlement on communities who live a nomadic lifestyle, though it allows nations to institute programmes of voluntary settlement of nomads where no level of coercion is brought to bear on these communities.

4. Requires that its Member Nations create formal systems of liaison between settled communities and Nomads which will clarify both parties needs and concerns, with the object of fairly and openly resolving disputes between these parties.

5. Requires that its Member Nations appoint Nomadic persons with appropriate expertise within their civil services to advise government departments on how best to tailor government services to the cultural and practical needs of Nomads. Where no such persons currently exist the provisions of clause 4 should suffice.

6. Requires its Member Nations to allow freedom of movement to nomads on terms agreed between nomads, settled communities and their governments, where such freedom does not constitute a material breach of national laws concerning trespass, vandalism or destruction of natural habitat, where these laws are not in material breach of clause 1. of this resolution. Further, Member Nations which are not currently at war with each other or in a state of otherwise hightened antagonism with each other, should cooperate to allow Nomads properly regularised but easily facilitated access across international borders, fairly allowing freedom of movement whilst maintaining border integrity.
I hereby propose that Andelain elect a WA Delegate as soon as possible.

Furthermore I encourage all WA members to vote in favour of this proposal.

--A
Last edited by Avatar on Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Illume Eltanin
Servant of the Land
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:46 pm

Post by Illume Eltanin »

Avatar wrote: I hereby propose that Andelain elect a WA Delegate as soon as possible.
Seconded.
Avatar wrote:Furthermore I encourage all WA members to vote in favour of this proposal.
Seconded and done by The Illumined.
Illume Eltanin
Visionary
The Illumined
User avatar
stonemaybe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Wallowing in the Zider Zee

Post by stonemaybe »

The Knowing The Best Father (previously Dictator) of Inis Rua is vindicated in his choice to keep Inis Rua clear of the clutches of the WA.
The World Assembly:

1. Requires that its Member Nations not discriminate against persons on the basis of their following a nomadic lifestyle or those who identify themselves as ethnically nomadic. Member nations must introduce laws to prevent discrimination against Nomads in the provision of goods and services, and private sector employment practices.

2. Requires that its Member Nations not institute policies of forced settlement on communities who live a nomadic lifestyle, though it allows nations to institute programmes of voluntary settlement of nomads where no level of coercion is brought to bear on these communities.

4. Requires that its Member Nations create formal systems of liaison between settled communities and Nomads which will clarify both parties needs and concerns, with the object of fairly and openly resolving disputes between these parties.

5. Requires that its Member Nations appoint Nomadic persons with appropriate expertise within their civil services to advise government departments on how best to tailor government services to the cultural and practical needs of Nomads. Where no such persons currently exist the provisions of clause 4 should suffice.

6. Requires its Member Nations to allow freedom of movement to nomads on terms agreed between nomads, settled communities and their governments, where such freedom does not constitute a material breach of national laws concerning trespass, vandalism or destruction of natural habitat, where these laws are not in material breach of clause 1. of this resolution. Further, Member Nations which are not currently at war with each other or in a state of otherwise hightened antagonism with each other, should cooperate to allow Nomads properly regularised but easily facilitated access across international borders, fairly allowing freedom of movement whilst maintaining border integrity.
Nonsense!

Nomads travelling in Inis Rua are commonplace. By their very nature these nomads can travel elsewhere if they find their welcome is not to their liking! Why should states pass legislation so that they are treated with kid gloves? Their own behaviour should be sufficient to earn the respect of their temporary neighbours, and if their behaviour is insufficient to earn this respect, then they are justifiably not welcome!
Aglithophile and conniptionist and spectacular moonbow beholder 16Jul11

(:/>
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Not kid gloves. Rather, it merely guarantees that they have access to basic services despite not having fixed address.

--A
User avatar
stonemaybe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Wallowing in the Zider Zee

Post by stonemaybe »

But why would these people travel to and try to live somewhere, where they won't have basic services? This WA proposal is actually an insult to nomadic people's intelligence.
Aglithophile and conniptionist and spectacular moonbow beholder 16Jul11

(:/>
User avatar
Illume Eltanin
Servant of the Land
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:46 pm

Post by Illume Eltanin »

Maybe.

But by having all WA nations abide by this resolution, it may give the nomadic clans more choice of places to go where basic services are provided.
Illume Eltanin
Visionary
The Illumined
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

On the contrary...it ensures that they are not discriminated against by insensitive beauracracy. :D

--A
User avatar
stonemaybe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Wallowing in the Zider Zee

Post by stonemaybe »

Avatar wrote:On the contrary...it ensures that they are not discriminated against by insensitive beauracracy. :D

--A
And yet, a government does not have to provide the same 'basic' services for its own citizens. So contrary to your contrary, it conceivably leads to discrimination, positive discrimination, towards nomads. Which in turn would create bitterness and resentment against them by joe public. Overturning generations of hard work by nomad families, where relationships have been built up on their travels.
Aglithophile and conniptionist and spectacular moonbow beholder 16Jul11

(:/>
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Nor do they have to provide them for any nomads. But if they do provide them for their own citizens of fixed abode, they are required to make them available for any nomadic citizens as well.

--A
User avatar
stonemaybe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Wallowing in the Zider Zee

Post by stonemaybe »

Avatar wrote:Nor do they have to provide them for any nomads. But if they do provide them for their own citizens of fixed abode, they are required to make them available for any nomadic citizens as well.

--A
oh ok :D ! (*muttering* still glad I don't have to have anything to do with such legislation in Inis Rua)
Aglithophile and conniptionist and spectacular moonbow beholder 16Jul11

(:/>
User avatar
rdhopeca
The Master
Posts: 2798
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:13 pm
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Contact:

Post by rdhopeca »

I am for this resolution, although it would seem that nomads would have to at least declare a "region of residency" to some degree to specify who should pay for their services...they can return there every so often to renew their IDs and legitimacy...
Rob

"Progress is made. Be warned."
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Agreed, although as it stands, it applies only to nomads who are citizens of your nation as far as I can see.

--A
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Well folks, a new World Assembly Proposal is up for vote"
Freedom of Marriage Act

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights


Strength: Significant


Proposed by: Mendosia

Description: The Nations of the World Assembly,

CONVINCED that the union of two persons should be equally protected by the State regardless of gender or sexual orientation,

CONVINCED that it is necessary to adopt worldwide standards for the protection of minorities whenever persons of these minorities decide to share a life together,

DETERMINED to further the rights of persons that have been oppressed and discriminated against for ages,

RESOLVED to provide a legal framework that enhances the social recognition of these minorities,

RECOGNIZING that religious communities have different views and are free to recognize or not such unions,

ADOPT the following resolution:

Article 1 (Object)

(a) This resolution applies to civil contracts regulating the union of two persons and its effects on the common estate and inheritance rights of the participants.

(b) This resolution does not affect the criteria and restrictions in existence for the celebration of rites within religious communities.

Article 2 (Protection of Marriage)

(a) All States shall have the minimum conditions to protect the union of two persons which shall include but are not restricted to provisions regulating the administration of the common estate and the inheritance rights acquired by those entering into such a union.

(b) The protection referred to in the previous section does not automatically confer any rights other than those that the State specifically provides for the protection of the union between two persons.

(c) The provisions of this article shall not be construed to diminish the status, rights or recognition of civil contracts already in existence.

Article 3 (Non-discrimination)

(a) No State shall restrict the right to enter into such unions to persons of a certain sex or sexual orientation, nor shall they require that they be of the same or different sex.

(b) No State shall establish different conditions, requirements or effects to unions of persons of the same or different sex.

(c) No State shall create special categories of contracts with similar goals and effects to those stated in the previous article while imposing any of the restrictions stated in the previous sections.
WA Members only, please indicate your votes. You can vote either way privately, but the majority vote will be the option which the WA Delegate will cast his delegate vote for.

VivAsana votes FOR the proposal.

--A
User avatar
Illume Eltanin
Servant of the Land
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:46 pm

Post by Illume Eltanin »

VivAsana has been a shining beacon within Andelain regarding the advancement of Civil Rights. It is the consensus of The Illumined to follow their lead regarding this proposal.

The Illumined votes FOR the Freedom of Marriage Act.
Illume Eltanin
Visionary
The Illumined
User avatar
danlo
Lord
Posts: 20837
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2002 8:29 pm
Location: Albuquerque NM
Contact:

Post by danlo »

I resolved to vote for this proposal after I received a telegram from the bill's sponsor The Gay Peninsula and it's delegate The Commonwealth of Mendosia. Interesting group. Only 17 but they've been around forever and are under "Superpower" influence. Interesting allies...
Last edited by danlo on Tue Sep 02, 2008 5:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
rdhopeca
The Master
Posts: 2798
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:13 pm
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Contact:

Post by rdhopeca »

i am for the proposal.
Rob

"Progress is made. Be warned."
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Only one more vote is required to make this the will of Andelain.

Since the score stands 4 in favour, 0 opposed, if no other nation has recorded it's vote in the next 12 hours, I propose the motion be carried and the delegate cast his bloc-vote in favour, before the deadline is reached.

--A
User avatar
danlo
Lord
Posts: 20837
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2002 8:29 pm
Location: Albuquerque NM
Contact:

Post by danlo »

Current Proposal:

Prohibit child pornography

A resolution to restrict civil freedoms in the interest of moral decency.


Category: Moral Decency


Strength: Significant


Proposed by: Reefi

Description: REALISING that in an interconnected World, pornography will circulate.

UNFORTUNATELY some of this pornography will contain children who are being forced to partake.

ARGUING that a child does not have the capability to determine whether or not to partake.

PROPOSING to outlaw child pornography, under international law (which would not breach Section 1, Resolution 2)

A CHILD, for purposes of this Resolution, is DEFINED as a person under the age of 18.

Article 1: It will be in defiance of international law to possess, or have voluntarily viewed, child pornography. This offense shall be known as POSSESSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.

Article 2: It will be in defiance of international law to knowingly permit the circulation of child pornography, unless for law enforcement purposes in which case the circulation should stop as soon as possible. This offense will be known as CONSPIRACY TO SUPPLY CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.

Article 3: Selling or providing child pornography shall be an additional offense under international law, in addition to possession as defined in Article 1. This offense will be known as SUPPLYING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.

Article 4: Child pornography is defined as any pictures (regardless of whether they are paintings, photographs, computer generated images, or videos) of children whom are naked or involved in sexual acts or in sexual positions. This includes computer generated images or cartoons.

Article 5: Exceptions may be made, at the discretion of an international court. Possible exceptions include when photographs have been taken exclusively for medical or scientific purposes.

Article 6: If any parties are outside the World Assembly's jurisdiction, an extradition may be requested by an international court or by a member state's law enforcement.

Article 7: National law enforcement agencies will have the responsibility to find any offenders and to transfer them into international custody, if it is decided they will be prosecuted.

Votes For: 3,094

Votes Against: 2,336
User avatar
Illume Eltanin
Servant of the Land
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:46 pm

Post by Illume Eltanin »

Latest proposal before the WA:
Sexual Privacy Act

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights


Strength: Significant


Proposed by: Mendosia

Description: The Nations of the World Assembly,

CONVINCED of the need for legal limits to government interference in the private lives of individuals,

RESOLVED to create the adequate conditions for the development of sexual identity and sexual self-determination,

ADOPT the following Resolution:

Article 1 (Object)

(a) This resolution establishes a right to sexual privacy without state intervention.

(b) The provisions contained in this resolution apply to humans.

(c) Each Nation shall make all the necessary adaptations to these provisions in order to grant the same level of sexual privacy protection to any other sentient species there may exist under their jurisdiction, provided that their existence is legally recognized.

Article 2 (Definitions)

(a) Sexual Acts: any acts between two or more individuals which involve stimulation of the sexual organs.

(b) Consenting: giving full agreement by words or behavior with respect to all aspects of the sexual act or acts one is engaging in, while not being in circumstances that significantly impair judgement and seriously affect volition, including but not limited to any forms of coercion, deception, error on the identity of the partner; nor suffering from a severe mental illness.

(c) Age of consent: the age above which the consent given for the purposes of the previous paragraph is valid, being invalid below the said age.

(d) Puberty: the period of development during which physical growth and sexual maturation occurs.

Article 3 (Sexual privacy and its conditions of application)

(a) No Nation shall enact legislation prohibiting, criminalizing or otherwise regulating sexual acts between consenting individuals when practiced in the privacy of the home, or otherwise away from public exposure.

(b) Each Nation can define an age of consent. Should a Nation fail to define an age of consent, the age of majority in use in said Nation shall apply. Should a Nation fail to establish an age of majority, the individual will be considered above the age of consent for the purposes of the previous paragraph if he/she has entered puberty.

(c) All Nations shall enact and enforce legislation deeming unlawful and duly punishing all sexual acts involving or committed against non-consenting or invalidly consenting individuals, without prejudice to any immunities applicable to minors or persons otherwise incompetent for the purposes of criminal responsibility.

(d) The provisions of this article will not be construed to ban the exercise of disciplinary power by independent professional organizations should an individual be unethically involved in sexual acts with a client or with someone otherwise under his/her authority or responsibility. The penalties applied in the context of a disciplinary process may only concern the professional status of the defendant and may not have criminal consequences, except in the cases covered in the previous paragraph. The ethical rules applied for the purposes of this paragraph will make no distinction with respect to gender or sexual orientation of the defendant.

Article 4 (Non-discrimination)

(a) No Nation shall establish an age of consent according to gender of the participating individuals or the nature of the sexual act.

(b) No Nation shall construe the notion of consent in such a way as to summarily deny that capacity to heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals or transgendered individuals.
Input anyone?
Illume Eltanin
Visionary
The Illumined
User avatar
[Syl]
Unfettered One
Posts: 13017
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:36 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by [Syl] »

I'm for it
"It is not the literal past that rules us, save, possibly, in a biological sense. It is images of the past. Each new historical era mirrors itself in the picture and active mythology of its past or of a past borrowed from other cultures. It tests its sense of identity, of regress or new achievement against that past.”
-George Steiner
Post Reply

Return to “Nationstates”