NationStates Jolt Archive

Seeing that if the current resolution passes, no UN state will be able to procure food from living organisms including animals, plants and fungi, and seeing that no other reasonable sources of food exist, will all UN states eventually cease to exist due to starvation of the population?

Seeing that if the current resolution passes, no UN state will be able to procure food from living organisms including animals, plants and fungi, and seeing that no other reasonable sources of food exist, will all UN states eventually cease to exist due to starvation of the population?

I'll put it this way - if passed UN resolutions were fulfilled literally, than yes. The UN nations would have the pleasure of watching their populations starve to death (well, except for the dogs and the birds of prey, as they will not give a damn about UN dictates).

With Respect,
Minister of Foreign Affairs Voegelin, Royal Commonwealth of Oakeshottland.

Agreed but there is no chance of stopping it so why complain?

We're going to die!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mliêstôlkakûmek(Love all as you love yourself)
Racism-the other stupid ideology
Peace, love, and girls with small waists and big butts!
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:TEA1WL6tIGQC:w1.150.telia.com/~u15008589

We're going to die!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mliêstôlkakûmek(Love all as you love yourself)
Racism-the other stupid ideology
Peace, love, and girls with small waists and big butts!
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:TEA1WL6tIGQC:w1.150.telia.com/~u15008589

I know. :cry:

Not only will no UN nation be able to eat, but this current measure would also ban antibiotics and immune systems! We'd no longer be able to protect ourselves against infection, for fear of killing harmless bacteria. Thus, everyone dies.

This kind of sillyness is exactly why Niebelungenland refuses to be any part of the UN. They are simply spelling out their own doom while erasing any form of national soverenity.

The Commonwealth of Cowes has been doing its best to lobby delegates with a polite reminder of the effects of this resolution if passed. It's been somewhat effective, but the Commonwealth can't do it alone.

If the situation doesn't improve, the Commonwealth of Cowes will have no choice but to resign from the UN so that its citizens will be able to... eat.

-The Commonwealth of Cowes

The Commonwealth of Cowes has been doing its best to lobby delegates with a polite reminder of the effects of this resolution if passed. It's been somewhat effective, but the Commonwealth can't do it alone.

If the situation doesn't improve, the Commonwealth of Cowes will have no choice but to resign from the UN so that its citizens will be able to... eat.

-The Commonwealth of Cowes

See my - "Time To Take Action" post.

United we stand - lets defeat this insanity together, and lets do it now.

Interesting how this U.N. is trying to destroy the world just like the real U.N. (ie, allowing terrorist nations to go unpunished even when violating U.N. resolutions :x )

my people are panicing fearing starvation, i have assured them that my government will ignore this resolution if passed, and that they should not concern themselves with its existance. I encourage all UN nations to protest this resolution if it passes by refusing to comply with it!

Stupid, crazy resolutions like this is exactly why Amarius is NOT in the UN. Not able to kill meat to eat? No plants, either? Wow, I just made my own stomach grumble. And as said above, no killing bacteria? Does that mean viruses as well? Great. Well, all you UN members, you've gotten yourselves AIDS. Watch your people age 20 years in 4 months! Pay-per-view entertainment here...

i wont be in the UN for long if this junk passes, my people come first

...my people come first

Agreed. What other means of food is there if it doesn't come from plants, animals, or fungi? Or did you all become cannibals?

noooo cannibalism would be illegal too, lol, soon my nation wont be Un so i have no worries. either this resolution goes or i and many pratical minded nations will go

Or you could have been like me and not have been involoved with the many silly resolutions of the UN, by not joining the UN.

lol i joined originally to help a friend, also the resolutions werent so bad back then, but now......

I very much agree, I will have to leave the U.N. unless,
1. This resolution is not passed (Equality for All)
and
2. A repeals process is put in place so we may repeal counter-productive purposals.

Really some resolutions are absolutely ridivolous such as this one

Excerpt from The Rights of Labor Unions:

4. Unions and their national and international organizations shall be free from interference by the public authorities when drawing up their constitutions and rules, electing their representatives, organizing their administration and activities, and formulating their programs.
5. Workers shall enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment, both at the time of entering employment and during the employment relationship.
7. National laws shall not be made to impair the guarantees provided for in this resolution. Laws that contradict these guarantees shall not be created or enforced.

4.Free from interference, that means goverments can't do anything about labor union issues like a criminalized labor unions, and curropt leaders.

5.Union discrimination, by what do they define as discrimination, would jailing somone in a labor union for killing a bussiness leader who refuses to comply with the union's demands be considered discrimination, yes because the killer was involved in a union activity and thus is being jailed for helping the union, so it's discrimination under this resolution.

7.This one is directly against national independance. It will literally put U.N. members under the heel of labor unions.

As long as resolutions like this are being made and there is no way to remove them, no oversite comitee, and people will actually vote for them the U.N. is incredibly vunerable.

how is this passing, look at this poll's results, then look at the real results. How is this happening?

my people are panicing fearing starvation, i have assured them that my government will ignore this resolution if passed, and that they should not concern themselves with its existance. I encourage all UN nations to protest this resolution if it passes by refusing to comply with it!

You will be forced to comply; that is why you get telegrams from the Compliance Ministry.

The only alternative is to resign from the UN.

how is this passing, look at this poll's results, then look at the real results. How is this happening?
It's because the people who voted for the resolution never check the message board. They're all newly accepted members who have no idea what the resolution really means. I have to admit that when I first saw it I didn't understand what it really meant. Those newbies will destroy the resolution unless we can mobalize the oldies and defeat the resolution.

newbs should be able to join the Un til 250mil population, maybe by then they will understand how the game works

newbs should be able to join the Un til 250mil population, maybe by then they will understand how the game works
Well not everyones that stupid, I for instance have displayed that I'm intellegent enough to be a good U.N. member by my votes on the world heritage list and equality for all resolutions. Perhaps a review process by regional delegates would be a better solution.

doh, pardon me, that was kinda harsh. i like your idea, stern but fair

the easy thing is to leave the UN

I may have to. It will be genocide if I don't(how ironic).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mliêstôlkakûmek(Love all as you love yourself)
Racism-the other stupid ideology
Peace, love, and girls with small waists and really big butts!
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg

Im amazed that this thing ws even able to get through the que, I figured Enodia would delete it by now,
Infinite Loop henceforth supports any declaration of War against the nation who wrote the proposal, and we will provide Military goods as the coalition sees Fit.

We are contemplating a massive attack that would involve nuclear weapons. We are willing to destroy those who brought this upon us to save the lives of billions of people all over the earth.

Hmmm... this is an idea. *rushes to the international incident board to get in on the fighting*

Perhaps you are reading too much into this resolution.
it says "We propose that all nations under the UN charter respect the very essence of life and vow to preserve and protect it, in all its many forms whether human, or otherwise. "

There is a diference between preserve and protect it and banning the killing of animals for food. I believe the intention of the resolution is to ban things like hunting and unnecessary killing say due to enviromental abuses.

By starving people you essentially disrespect human life which contradicts the resolution. Therefore it seems logical that some life will have to end to sustain other life. As it has always been. The restrictions are on excess.

The wording is intentional and correct Please visit the following forums page for understanding.

http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=88365

Respectfully,
Emperor Dalith

We will not allow you to kill the entire UN. Our fleet of interplanetary warships will soon receive the ultimate upgrade: FTL! Not that it would make you any easier to defeat.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mliêstôlkakûmek(Love all as you love yourself)
Racism-the other stupid ideology
Peace, love, and girls with small waists and really big butts!
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg

Do Not Over-Analyze this, you must not look into this resolution too deeply it means exactly what it says...

Some have mentioned that there are resolutions that have been put in place that address some of the issues, I disagree.

The End Slavery resolution had been specific to declare the following:
..."I propose that the following human rights "...

I'm sure you have noticed that more then just some nations in this cyber-created world aren't even human fiction or non, real or imaginary who’s to say here? I have seen nations inhabited by talking beasts, vampires, elves, dwarves, (such as ours)...We feel that our nation is not under the protection of the past resolution and this is an amendment to that.

Also,

There are two more resolutions that are being Retro-Amended of a sort to include ALL (Key word), that is the Sexual Freedom resolution, and the Gay Rights resolution. The former resolution asks for sexual privacy within one's home out of reach of the state...and the latter asks for recognition of marriages and unions from the government. Don't get me wrong these were very VERY good resolutions that were much needed, but, I do have to say that our simply stated yet very effective proposal, asks for the banishment of the archaic Government usage and practice of sexual categorization based on bias. The government should not have to recognize a gay marriage for example, because with the passage of our proposal such a thing would not be allowed a categorization, marriages between two (in some cultures more) life energies is all it should be considered...a union, a marriage, that's all. Not a gay marriage or straight marriage. This bi-lateral recognition only breeds hatred, prejudice, bigotry and is only good for creating a schism between people.

I have brought this to the floor now, because looking at the proposals that are pending approval from MEMBER Nations, and Regional Delegates alike, the sense of this attitude of hatred and inequality is the norm for these nations, and if they feel that way great, but they should be asked to step down from UN member status.

Our great nation, like many that you would find congregating in many regions, have more then just a human populace if any inhabit them at all, and we are member states of the UN, and wish to be recognized as well. Even the category of the proposal states Human Rights...well those rights need to extend to ALL...human or otherwise.

For those nations that think that the wording is incorrect, first I ask again do not over-analyze this proposal. The individual governments have the rights to a degree of flexible interpretations and the UN therefore must be careful not to become too specific in details and not allow for such interpretive rights.

However, we understand your confusion, and to clarify, the language need not be changed. For the simplicity of the original wording is exactly what you want it to say. The key word is BEINGS. The choice of that word is not accidental, it was used after I researched the many definitions of the word and the following best commutes that meaning:

Being (Be"ing), n.
2. That which exists in any form, whether it be corporeal or spiritual, actual or ideal that understands and has a sense of "being v." acknowledges its existence and that of others; living existence, as distinguished from a thing without life; as, a human being; spiritual beings.
2a.Sentient

I believe also that the meaning of harm is simple. Every nation has it's own moral beliefs and if sex in the streets is not harming anyone then so it may be. However, if your government is ruled by a religous leader or follow a religous doctrine, well then sex in the streets may be viewed as someone infringing on the rights of those who do not wish to see that sort of thing and can be viewed as harmful to them. Such things are up to the individual government. Harm is again a word that was researched and the following definition was common from many different sources.

Harm (härm), n.
1. Any physical damage to the body caused by violence or accident or fracture etc.
5. Inflicted mental distress with measurable results such as psychological and or physical apparitions.

Again, the definition was explained above, and unless the nation is inhabited by or ruled by a species that is sentient (ie., talking cows, vampires that become bats, or insert creature here) then I don't see how animal rights activists can use this proposal for meat consumption banning. In fact I personally find animal activists to be hypocrites in the sense that they ask to ban meat eating but some species are carnivorous by NATURE, and is needed for their survival including most animals, and being that sentient species such as the human race for example, are technically animals... then they must respect that fact of NATURE. Human beings, on the other hand, are NOT by nature cannibals, although some societies live and thrive as such the killing of their own species is widely considered immoral, but that is not what I should be getting into.

As to the concern of anti-abortion activism, this cannot be used to abolish or outlaw abortion. For one thing it is not proven scientifically when the fetus gains the consciousness needed to be considered a sentient being, and although it is a life force, it's a life force created by the mother and father, and as such can be reabsorbed into the maternal life force, in fact all life can be said to return or be absorbed into the metaphysical cycle. Therefore again the answer to your question is no.

I hope to have answered all your questions in a courteous manner. Feel free to contact me directly if you wish me to address any other concerns.




Respectfully,
Emperor Dalith

Stop posting the same justification.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mliêstôlkakûmek(Love all as you love yourself)
Racism-the other stupid ideology
Peace, love, and girls with small waists and really big butts!
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg

More of the same rhetoric from United Middle Earth will not be tolerated.

Ah, finally, some clarification.

As to the concern of anti-abortion activism, this cannot be used to abolish or outlaw abortion. For one thing it is not proven scientifically when the fetus gains the consciousness needed to be considered a sentient being, and although it is a life force, it's a life force created by the mother and father, and as such can be reabsorbed into the maternal life force, in fact all life can be said to return or be absorbed into the metaphysical cycle. Therefore again the answer to your question is no.

Unfortunately, by the whole metaphysical argument, then murder is OK. Why? The metaphysical cycle does not differetiate between sentient life and plant life. So by killing someone, they are "being absorbed back into the metaphysical cycle."

This also leads to the issue of whether humans in vegetable states are sentient or not. This then reduces them to the mere status of plant and thus are no longer granted the right to exist. I won't say anything further on this particular topic, because I do digress, but do you see the point?

BTW, much thanks for the clarification of your seemingly ambigious resolution. In an attempt to include ALL races, it made it very unclear :lol:

Rad Kom
UN Ambassador
The Fiefdom of Baron Porkonia

He's using some form of religious argument. No one here believes what he's talking about.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mliêstôlkakûmek(Love all as you love yourself)
Racism-the other stupid ideology
Peace, love, and girls with small waists and really big butts!
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg