NationStates Jolt Archive

The Humanistas Praestantia Protocol aims for the creation of an international set of guidelines to define what is human and what is not.
This issue is mainly related to the genetic arena. Nations such as ours, that divert an important share of it's investigations and research on the modification of human life, will be surely interested by the Protocol.

The point here is to open the talks for a future enactement of the Protocol, in order to set international standarts among the nations that sign it.

The benefits of such Protocol are many, most importantly on the clasification and preservation of Humans as superior specie above derivations of it.
To take an example, we can put the ProdClones and WarClones we currently mass-produce. These beings were, in their early times, original human beings. However, and thanks to advances in both bioengineering and mind mechanics, we have been able to modify them to a point where they can hardly be recognized as anything related to humans. They lack of self will, more than the one given to them through neural computers, and their body structure varies in a myriad of ways, all of them depending on the task intended for them.
ProdClones are one of the backbones of our industry, as WarClones are of our infantry. However, in the nearly ninety years since their first massive introduction to our nation, they have been seen like little more than mere machines with vague human ressemblance.

Now, the HP Protocol seeks to keep the regular status of Humans as a specie worthy of rights, while defining how much of a modification can be or can be not considered for it.

We have a current set of proposals and paragraphs that we belive could be added to this projected Protocol:


1.-Genetic Classification: The basic human genetic code remains as the base guideline for the Protocol. This would, with a differential ratio of a 0.2%, define what is human and what is not. Any so called being that is claimed to have human origin, and that fails to meet the maximum difference of the 0.2% will not be considered as one.

1.a.-Clarification: Species not related to human origins, such as Elves, Catpeople, extraterrestial lifeforms and the like do not fall into the overseen categories, due to their non-human quality. They are, therefore, excent of any issue presented in the Protocol.

1.b.-Clarification: The maximum genetic difference of 0.2% will only affect post-human derivations, and not pre-human ones. Therefore, any specie, related to humans, that has been spawned previous to the Homo Sapiens-Sapiens will not fall into the overseen categories. They are, therefore, excent of any issue presented in the Protocol.

1.c.-Modification: "Self Will": Post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet the maximum genetic regulation can, in the case of Self Will prescence, considered humans, but only if they berhave and interact following exact human patterns.


2.-Worthiness of Rights: Any post-human/sub-human specie that fails to meet Paragraph 1 will not be considered to fit as "Human" on what is related to International Rights. They are, therefore, not under U.N. Human Rights jurisdictions.

2.a.-Extension: Post-human/pre-human species that do not meet Paragraph 1 will be under the jurisdiction of their own nation's jurisprudential system. Therefore, the state is free to enact any form of law and/or restriction related to the specie in particular.


3.-Existential Status: Post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet Paragraph 1, and do not meet the minimum requeriment stated in Modification 1.c, will fall on either the "Animal" category or be classified as a "Good" of public/private ownership.

3.a.-Clarification: A post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet Paragraph 1, and do not meet the minimum requeriment stated in Modification 1.c, will be considered "Animal" in the case of impossible detection of Self Awareness and/or a genetic difference above the 1%.

3.b.-Clarification: A post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet Paragraph 1, and do not meet the minimum requeriment stated in Modification 1.c, will be considered "Good" of public/private ownership in the case of it having been developed by an institution and/or individual.

3.b.a.-Clarification: Clarification 3.b will only be effective as long as the designed/created specie had not been considered as part of animal/plant life prior to the design/creation.

3.b.b.-Clarification: The tipe of ownership (public/private) falls under jurisdiction of the local Ownership Constitution, in order to be considered one of the two.

3.b.c.-Extension: As the specie falls in the classification of "Good", it is affected by the same laws/restrictions as other goods and products, and therefore will enter the economic flow as one of them.



These are only basic points we have designed to be implemented in the Protocol. They are, by no means, definitive/mandatory, and they must be discussed openly for modification, regulation, clarification and extension.



http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/finisvalorum/img/eu_sm.jpg
Karloff Allamand, FTR's Chieff Diplomatic Chancellor

How was the .2% decided upon?
We are rather suspicious of such treaties as we tend to dislike international regulations regarding genetics or our scientific projects.

"2.-Worthiness of Rights: Any post-human/sub-human specie that fails to meet Paragraph 1 will not be considered to fit as "Human" on what is related to International Rights. They are, therefore, not under U.N. Human Rights jurisdictions. "

On this point we STRONGLY Disagree. Anything Created by humans shoulbe be accountable to humans. This claws allows for a new slave trade to imerge, any thing which can be described as sentient should be treated with utmost awe and respect, regardless of its motives, purpose, appearence, and should be granted the same rites and privilages as its creators.

until this blatent disregard for the sancity of life is amended Cairn Tarra will not in any support this proposal, and will view any nation that dose with increased suspision.

Honour where Honoured, by the will of the council.

However, if you check Modification 1.c:

1.c.-Modification: "Self Will": Post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet the maximum genetic regulation can, in the case of Self Will prescence, considered humans, but only if they berhave and interact following exact human patterns.


Here is clearly stipulated that Self Aware creatures are excent of Paragraph 2.


Originaly posted by Pilon:
How was the .2% decided upon?
We are rather suspicious of such treaties as we tend to dislike international regulations regarding genetics or our scientific projects.


The 0.2% was decided upon a relative maximum difference of the basic human code. For example, the nearest specie of monkeys has a 1.1% genetic difference with humans, and bannannas (from the Bannano specie), hold a abyssal 53% genetic difference.

but only if they berhave and interact following exact human patterns.

we still believe that this document needs at least a further draft beafore we would support it

we appologise for being so quick to respond, you have touched a bit of a nerve with the council.

And this is the point of this, honorable representatives of CairnTarra, to make the Protocol open to discussion and modification. Otherwise, it would be impossible to reach a multilateral consensus on the matter.

once again the council sends its appologies, we as a nation are not acustomed to dealing in the inter regional theater here presented.
we have drafted some ammendments to this polecy which would make it more then acceptible by our nation, the modifications are in bold type to make them easier to desern
--------------------------------
1.-Genetic Classification: The basic human genetic code remains as the base guideline for the Protocol. This would, with a differential ratio of a 0.2%, define what is human and what is not. Any so called being that is claimed to have human origin, and that fails to meet the maximum difference of the 0.2% will not be considered as one.

1.a.-Clarification: Species not related to human origins, such as Elves, Catpeople, extraterrestial lifeforms and the like do not fall into the overseen categories, due to their non-human quality. They are, therefore, excent of any issue presented in the Protocol.

1.b.-Clarification: The maximum genetic difference of 0.2% will only affect post-human derivations, and not pre-human ones. Therefore, any specie, related to humans, that has been spawned previous to the Homo Sapiens-Sapiens will not fall into the overseen categories unless they fall into the bracket defined in ammendment T1. They are, therefore, excent of any issue presented in the Protocol.

Ammendment T1 - Any Orginism regardless of origin or age, which can exibit Sentience, has the right not to be enslaved by humanity, such orginisms should be treated as persons of no given nationality, and attributed all the rights as each individual nation provides them

1.c.-Modification: "Self Will": Post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet the maximum genetic regulation can, in the case of Self Will prescence, be granted access to the same rights as humans, ((removed:)but only if they berhave and interact following exact human patterns.)


2.-Worthiness of Rights: Any post-human/sub-human specie that fails to meet Paragraph 1 will not be considered to fit as "Human" on what is related to International Rights. They are, therefore, not under U.N. Human Rights jurisdictions.

2.a.-Extension: Post-human/pre-human species that do not meet Paragraph 1 will be under the jurisdiction of their own nation's jurisprudential system. Therefore, the state is free to enact any form of law and/or restriction related to the species in particular.


3.-Existential Status: Post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet Paragraph 1, and do not meet the minimum requeriment stated in Modification 1.c, will fall on either the "Animal" category or be classified as a "Good" of public/private ownership.

3.a.-Clarification: A post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet Paragraph 1, and do not meet the minimum requeriment stated in Modification 1.c, (modified)will be considered "Animal" in the case of no Self Awareness and a genetic difference above the 1%.

3.b.-Clarification: A post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet Paragraph 1, and do not meet the minimum requeriment stated in Modification 1.c, will be considered "Good" of public/private ownership in the case of it having been developed by an institution and/or individual.

3.b.a.-Clarification: Clarification 3.b will only be effective as long as the designed/created specie had not been considered as part of animal/plant life prior to the design/creation.

3.b.b.-Clarification: The tipe of ownership (public/private) falls under jurisdiction of the local Ownership Constitution, in order to be considered one of the two.

3.b.c.-Extension: As the specie falls in the classification of "Good", it is affected by the same laws/restrictions as other goods and products, and therefore will enter the economic flow as one of them.

Ammendment T1 would actually not be of any further effect, since Clarification 1.b expresses that only post-human species will be considered to fall into the jurisdiction of Paragraph 1. Therefore, these species will not be reached by the points of the HP Protocol.
This would also mean that the modification made to Clarification 1.b is unnessesary and irrelevant.

Regarding the change of Modification 1.c, it coudl raise a problem, since there is needed a way to define how human is the subject before granting it rights made for Humans. A specie with a wide genetic difference, no matter how Self Aware it is, is not human, and, therefore, human rights should not aply to them.
In such a case, a different Proclamation of Rights will have to be made for the specific specie.


http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/finisvalorum/img/eu_sm.jpg
Karloff Allamand, FTR's Chieff Dimplomatic Chancellor

Ammendment T1 would actually not be of any further effect, since Clarification 1.b expresses that only post-human species will be considered to fall into the jurisdiction of Paragraph 1. Therefore, these species will not be reached by the points of the HP Protocol.
This would also mean that the modification made to Clarification 1.b is unnessesary and irrelevant

"post human" is some what in accurate, as a hypothetical situation is 200 years if a lower species evolves sentience, as the species geneom predates the homio sapiens sapiens geneome it will fall into the protoclls of this agreement,
that isnt acceptible,
We do understand that T1 dose restate some of the features of the earlier document, however we believe it states them in such a fuindimentally simple way that it could not be abused, and as it is purly a restatment, theres no harm in leaving it in is there? :)

We agree with your other point, however once again the modification is to prevent abuce, to present another example if an exta tarrestrial arrives form a sociaty which by physical restrictions or customs requires it to function Other the to exacting human patterns then it could be argued that it falles into this bracket, the modification of the paragraph removes this danger

However, if you check Modification 1.c:

1.c.-Modification: "Self Will": Post-human/sub-human species that fail to meet the maximum genetic regulation can, in the case of Self Will prescence, considered humans, but only if they berhave and interact following exact human patterns.


Here is clearly stipulated that Self Aware creatures are excent of Paragraph 2.


Originaly posted by Pilon:
How was the .2% decided upon?
We are rather suspicious of such treaties as we tend to dislike international regulations regarding genetics or our scientific projects.


The 0.2% was decided upon a relative maximum difference of the basic human code. For example, the nearest specie of monkeys has a 1.1% genetic difference with humans, and bannannas (from the Bannano specie), hold a abyssal 53% genetic difference.

So why not choose 1%... why choose a specific % at all?

having a percentage difference requirement is subjective, therefore it dosent rely on qualitive means to assess how Human somthing is, therefore is more difficult to abuse...

we would be worruied however that dew to continuing evolution the difference between the homio sapiens spicies will differ to a greater ammount then 0.2%, this could be a bit anti-semitic ((ooc: or however you spell it.. damn you dislexia)) however 1.c and T1 take care of that

//OOC: Although I do not generaly make this, allow me to bump this up in order to allow for the apropiate discussion of this Protocol//

It's good.

It's good.

We tend to agree, however we wonder if it would not be more appropriate to define what a Sentient Being is, instead of merely what a Human Being is.

We agree with the Vortex Corporation. It´s sentience that counts, not the genetic code.

Anything else would simply end in racism, and this cannot be good for the development of mankind.

The Protocol seeks to use both elements, self awareness and genetic similarity, to define Human from Non-Human. However, we can not base the entire clasification simply on the prescense of Self Will. A genetic similarity must be found in order to properly state the individual as Human, and not as any of the other sentient species.

i think what's critical here is that we afford what we call human rights to all sentient, self - aware species that have been previously talked about in this post. defining what a human in this context of multiple sentient species can only ever be a biological one, where the genetic difference would be applicable. standards of behaviour, rights and abilities would not be, as despite the limited genetic variance, each individual human is massively different.

affording human rights to other sentient species is wrong as well - surely they should become 'sentient' rights, rather than human ones, and be brought under an umbrella resolution that proclaims whatever rights for all sentient species, rather than tacked on in an amendment to the universal decleration of human rights?

Jixie

We agree with the above statement, perhaps for the purpose of this bill we should also define sentient rights vs. human rights,
In our opinion these rights should be identical, and we hold it that the majority of sysguardian nations will already view non-human sentients with equality, however, we should use this bill to clarify a regional continuity for these dealings.

With the blessings of The First Wittan of Cairn Tarra

<We> find these guidelines//directions to be most inspiring//admirable.

<We> would be most willing to sign//agree to abide by these guidelines//directions.

<Steel-Cold>
Alfa of the NEXT Research department. <Inquisitor Sect>