NationStates Jolt Archive

WE prepose that all legislation, unless otherwise specified be held applicable to non-human nations.

WE also call for the end of discrimination against non-humans and that a special vote be passed on resolution supporting the rights of all non-human nations to access to the UN Human rights charter.

We also call on the recognition of the sovereignty and 'human' rights of all non-human intelligent and sentient beings as represented through Nation States.

We finally call that the wording 'human' be applicable to all non-humans (as with the wording 'man' to human humans) unless otherwise specified.

We would like to create debate on the above preposals for UN voting.

WE prepose that all legislation, unless otherwise specified be held applicable to non-human nations.

WE also call for the end of discrimination against non-humans and that a special vote be passed on resolution supporting the rights of all non-human nations to access to the UN Human rights charter.

We also call on the recognition of the sovereignty and 'human' rights of all non-human intelligent and sentient beings as represented through Nation States.

We finally call that the wording 'human' be applicable to all non-humans (as with the wording 'man' to human humans) unless otherwise specified.

We would like to create debate on the above preposals for UN voting.

Although I agree that some rights could and should be extended, that's kind of funny. It implies "end of discrimination against non-humans" includes animals, vegetables, and minerals.

We support this proposal. We feel its wording should be more exact, so as to specify that it will grant rights to sentient, intelligent beings, not simply to any creature that happens to not be human. It is doubtful it it will be passed in its current form. However, we strongly agree with the spirit of the proposal, as the basic equality of all sentient intelligent beings is a deeply held moral belief of the vast majority of our citizens.

Office of the Governor
Royal Colony at NationStates
Planetian Empire

well any help in rewording the preposal would be accepted. Even if it is never, never, never, ever passed at least we can say we tried :)
I'm not very good at writting these sort of preposals so any and all help would be galdly accepted.

It seems to crush the food chain.

WE prepose that all legislation, unless otherwise specified be held applicable to non-human nations.

WE also call for the end of discrimination against non-humans and that a special vote be passed on resolution supporting the rights of all non-human nations to access to the UN Human rights charter.

We also call on the recognition of the sovereignty and 'human' rights of all non-human intelligent and sentient beings as represented through Nation States.

We finally call that the wording 'human' be applicable to all non-humans (as with the wording 'man' to human humans) unless otherwise specified.

We would like to create debate on the above preposals for UN voting.

Although I agree that some rights could and should be extended, that's kind of funny. It implies "end of discrimination against non-humans" includes animals, vegetables, and minerals.

It doesn't apply to vegetables and minerals if you read carefully, but it DOES apply to anamals, and I disagree with them being equal to me.

I guess you can have rights. Humans would want equal rights in an alien society. I'd like to see it changed to cover only lifeforms capable of logical reasoning though. Otherwise they really don't need equal rights in my opinion. I mean I consider my dog intelligent, for a dog. But that doesn't mean she gets to sit at the table and eat the same food I do.

Non humans have the right to be made into hamburgers!!!!

Non humans have the right to be made into hamburgers!!!!

For those words, we will be watching you. Tread lightly!

Now then, what about sentient plants, such as Triffids? And how about Silicoids? They are sentient, yet not animal. Some even have a burgeoning interstellar trade agreement in place, and have brilliant scientists and engineers. I would change wording to include ALL sentient life forms. That igneous rock could be your brother-in-law one day!

http://home.earthlink.net/~peterpank/gaarmb.JPG

Human Rights are for Humans.

Not for Gerbils or the Intergalacticly inclined.

Non humans have the right to be made into hamburgers!!!!

For those words, we will be watching you. Tread lightly!

Now then, what about sentient plants, such as Triffids? And how about Silicoids? They are sentient, yet not animal. Some even have a burgeoning interstellar trade agreement in place, and have brilliant scientists and engineers. I would change wording to include ALL sentient life forms. That igneous rock could be your brother-in-law one day!

http://home.earthlink.net/~peterpank/gaarmb.JPG

What are Triffids and Silicoids? Do they even exist in NationStates? If they do, I'll gladly dump some weed killer on them and save us a lot of headache. And I don't have a sister, but if I did why would she marry a rock? Even if she did it's not sentient.

What if we just tweak the proposal a tiny bit? Let's see...

"
WE declare that for the purposes of this resolution, the word "nation" shall be defined as a socio-political-economic entity recognized as a sovereign body by NationStates.

WE prepose that all United Nations legislation, unless otherwise specified, be held applicable to non-human nations.

WE also call for the end of discrimination against non-human self-aware beings, and for a special vote on a resolution supporting the right of the citizens of all non-human nations to be given access to the rights listed within the United Nations Human Rights Charter.

We also call for the recognition of the sovereignty and 'human' rights of all non-human self-aware beings as represented in NationStates.

We finally call that the term 'human' in all United Nations legislation be applicable to all non-human self-aware beings unless otherwise specified.
"

Now, the proposal grants human rights to non-human beings, whether vegetable, animal, or mineral, but only if they are self-aware. A rock or a moss colony, lacking self-awareness, would not be protected. Non-human nations are also recognized by the proposal, but in order to form a NationState, the non-human beings in question would have to be intelligent, so that is not an issue.

Office of the Governor

THE BILL OF NON-HUMAN RIGHTS

Article I: You have the right to remain silent. We don't care about your innane babble that we can't understand and we will censor you.
Article II: You have the right to be regarded as inferior to humans. You really are.
Article III: You have the right to be searched without a warrant. It's for protecting our children.
Article IV: You have the right to be shot. We developed guns before you did. Refer to Darwin.
Article V: You have the right to be imprisoned without trial. We're not spending so much money on things that aren't even human.
Article VI: You have the right to die on the streets. It's bad enough robbing Peter to pay Paul, but robbing Peter to pay a grizzly bear?
Article VII: You have the right to agree with humans on each and every subject. In fact, we'd perfer you exercize this right.
Article VIII: You have the right to die of a tragic and horrendous disease. Our doctors are not trained in your physiology.
Article IX: You have the right to be enslaved. As your evolutionary superiors, we own you.
Article X: All the rights listed above are inalienable and should only be waived in the most extreme of circumstances.

In the name of Allrighty Gosh...

<For a moment, a stunned silence falls amongst the governor and her advisers.>

Ahem. We sure hope The Global Market is not invaded by a super-advanced alien species armed with death rays and minds so powerfull that they will view GM's citizens as mere pests and a passable food source...

<Louder, towards sky>

We *SAID* we SURE HOPE The Global Market IS NOT invaded by a super-advanced alien species armed with death rays and minds so powerfull that they will view GM's citizens as MERE PESTS and a PASSABLE FOOD SOURCE!!!

Office of the Governor

THE BILL OF NON-HUMAN RIGHTS

Article I: You have the right to remain silent. We don't care about your innane babble that we can't understand and we will censor you.
Article II: You have the right to be regarded as inferior to humans. You really are.
Article III: You have the right to be searched without a warrant. It's for protecting our children.
Article IV: You have the right to be shot. We developed guns before you did. Refer to Darwin.
Article V: You have the right to be imprisoned without trial. We're not spending so much money on things that aren't even human.
Article VI: You have the right to die on the streets. It's bad enough robbing Peter to pay Paul, but robbing Peter to pay a grizzly bear?
Article VII: You have the right to agree with humans on each and every subject. In fact, we'd perfer you exercize this right.
Article VIII: You have the right to die of a tragic and horrendous disease. Our doctors are not trained in your physiology.
Article IX: You have the right to be enslaved. As your evolutionary superiors, we own you.
Article X: All the rights listed above are inalienable and should only be waived in the most extreme of circumstances.

What? Run out of poor people to exploit?

Dear Government of The Global Market,

Please don't make us eat you.

Sincerely,

Supreme Council of the Advanced Mollusks

The Non-Human Union is seeking to pass a measure to place sanctions against your country until you apologise for saying such offensive and discriminatory rubbish as an official government body.

Your personal views are your own and we cannot stop you from doing such things in your nation… for now. TNHU ‘nation’ itself, Biotopia and Three Fjords Pine (the grizzly nation) all place sanctions against you immediately. We ask any other animal-loving, rational nation to follow suite and to demand an apology as well.

Good day to you. You will hear from us soon I suspect.

Formal address to The Non-Human Union site. Simply leave a message saying you have joined, it's that easy! Of cause if you are evil animal hating scum then you can forget about it.

Also a preposal for an amendment to the fantastic rewritten preposal. What about the rights of self-aware, ITELLIGENT, RATIONAL species (becuase things like coral are self aware too) within other nations.

http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=71449&highlight=

We reserve the right to eat humans and to use their bones in our quaint folk-crafts.

-Gensec Khan
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/the_communist_orks.jpg

Um, anything that says "Non-human" and doesn't specify to what it is referring, then it would extend to vegetables and minerals.. Maybe I missed the whole "I'm talking about animals..."

I support the proposal for sentient rights, emphasis on the SENTIENT. I'm not talking about cows or pigs or fungi or rocks, but sentient life-forms, particularly those that can communicate with humans.

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

I support the proposal for sentient rights, emphasis on the SENTIENT. I'm not talking about cows or pigs or fungi or rocks, but sentient life-forms, particularly those that can communicate with humans.

I don't think you could discriminate on the basis that a species doesn't want to talk to you. Dogs for example are self aware, realtivly intelligent and can communicate with people. But i think you have to draw the line between 'Animal' rights and 'Non-Human' Rights,

By non-human i am always talking about those none homo sapian species that demonstrate they have the criteria to be classified as such by 'speaking' on the threads. That doesn't mean it can't apply to say a non-human species which is within a nation but being repressed or ones that arre yet be found in the nationstates universe.

For the sake of simplicity, let us grant rights to all "self-aware" beings. We do not belive coral is self-aware... let us define self-awareness as "the mental capacity to recognize the fact of one's existance and one's place as a part of a larger world." There are several scientific tests which can determine self-awarenes... one example would be a mirror self-recognition test. By observing the behaviour of a creature placed in front of a mirror, it is possible to determine with fair accuracy whether the creature is responding to the image in the mirror as its own reflection, or as another creature. A being that understands, after a time, that it is seeing its own reflection must be self-aware, as a concept of one's existance and one's place in the world is required to understand that the image in the mirror is an imitation of one and one's actions. Of course, other tests for self-awareness are possible, and may sometimes be required.

Self-awareness is a benchmark of intelligence. A creature that is self-aware would, by necessity, also need to be intelligent and sentient, and thus would deserve the rights granted within this proposal. However, the proposal does have to be edited to include a definition of self-awareness.

Deer are self-aware. The only rights they have are the right to be shot.

Deer are self-aware. The only rights they have are the right to be shot.

Deer, self-aware? I fidn that hard to belive, although it's more logical than cows being self-aware. All they do is eat grass all day.

Deer are self-aware. The only rights they have are the right to be shot.

Are deer really self-aware as defined by the Planetians' resolution?

Very well, now that we think about it self-awareness may NOT be the best determining factor. In some cases, it may simply be too difficult to test such a complex and subjective concept...

Let us say that the beings in question must be capable of communicating abstract concepts to each other. Such a capability would necessitate high levels of intelligence. At the same time, it is quite feasable to test, as observing the natural behaviour of the creatures over a period of time would readily reveal whether they have a language or some other means of communicating complex ideas. Once the United Nations recognizes scientific research showing such a capactiy in any particular species, the proposal above would go into play, and the creatures in question would be awarded their "human" rights.

Office of the Governor

Deer are self-aware. The only rights they have are the right to be shot.Capitalists are self-aware too, not to mention tasty.

-Gensec Khan

Role play your nations however you want in the other forums. I don't care if you want to be elves or whatever. But keep this crap out of the UN forum please.

Dear Global Market in case you should happen to read this we too are joining the sanction against you indefinetly for the remarks you made in the Non-Human Rights thread. Sorry just had to get that out the way.

Well if included all criteria that we should be able to pretty well define who does and don't get "human" rights. For example being self aware is important. As is communicating abstract ideas to one another. Although now that you mention it why shouldn't deer be protected. But i guess if they are unable to tell the world they want it, it's not going to happen.

I support the proposal for sentient rights, emphasis on the SENTIENT. I'm not talking about cows or pigs or fungi or rocks, but sentient life-forms, particularly those that can communicate with humans.

I don't think you could discriminate on the basis that a species doesn't want to talk to you. Dogs for example are self aware, realtivly intelligent and can communicate with people. But i think you have to draw the line between 'Animal' rights and 'Non-Human' Rights,

By non-human i am always talking about those none homo sapian species that demonstrate they have the criteria to be classified as such by 'speaking' on the threads. That doesn't mean it can't apply to say a non-human species which is within a nation but being repressed or ones that arre yet be found in the nationstates universe.

I have to break this to you, but dogs aren't sentient. The species that are closest to sentience would be dolphins and chimpanzees.

I support the proposal for sentient rights, emphasis on the SENTIENT. I'm not talking about cows or pigs or fungi or rocks, but sentient life-forms, particularly those that can communicate with humans.

I don't think you could discriminate on the basis that a species doesn't want to talk to you. Dogs for example are self aware, realtivly intelligent and can communicate with people. But i think you have to draw the line between 'Animal' rights and 'Non-Human' Rights,

By non-human i am always talking about those none homo sapian species that demonstrate they have the criteria to be classified as such by 'speaking' on the threads. That doesn't mean it can't apply to say a non-human species which is within a nation but being repressed or ones that arre yet be found in the nationstates universe.

I have to break this to you, but dogs aren't sentient. The species that are closest to sentience would be dolphins and chimpanzees.

My dog can beat a dolphin any day. I won't accept any counter-arguments. Sorry. It's not up for debate.