NationStates Jolt Archive

I have submitted a proposal entitled "Repeal Legalise Euthanasia".

This proposal seeks to undo the recently passed "Legalise Euthanasia" proposal.

It says that the UN will make no laws to determine the right to die laws for member nations.

It also draws attention to the glaring spelling error in the title of the passed proposal as legalize is spelled "Legalise". I listed it in the same manner to let people know that this proposal is to repeal the same proposal. It's an embarrassment to have such a mistake in the title of an international law!

Euthanasia is legal in my territory. This does not mean that I should force my view on others.

The right to die laws are personal, and the entire spectrum of laws should be respected by the UN.

The UN has gone too far in its last proposal. Let's correct this wrong!

If you have any questions, please send me a telegram.

Thank you,
Maguro

aye Maguro, I agree. Legalizing murder is some grabage. I have just recently resigned from the UN due to its failure to provide for the health and denfense of the world. If your repeal becomes a resolution, I can guarantee mine and several of my fellow nations within my regions to support it.

The grace of God be with your spirit.
- Cefwyn, Christ's humble servant

I don't see it as murder. I'm trying to avoid demonizing euthanasia. There has already been plenty of debate on this issue.

I think that this issue is an area that is not appropriate for the United Nations. It is up to each individual nation to decide their own policy. That's what my proposal is about.

I really hope people can take a serious look at my proposal.

Bunch of babies, all of you. Why didn't you get angry when "Citizen Rule Required" passed? Why not "Gay Rights"? Those forced things upon nations. "Elimination of Bio Weapons" forced Nevermoore to become a weakened nation. Look at the resolutions of the UN and you'll see Euthanasia is one of the better ones. I don't see why you all choose NOW to complain. Hypocrites.

Nevermoore's Ambassador to the United Nations:
Emelia Hearting

Nevermoore Wrote
Bunch of babies, all of you. Why didn't you get angry when...
"Citizen Rule Required" passed?
This resolution was passed to ensure all peoples of a nation were represented failrly and equitably with equal power. A side line to this was to help form democratic nations to rid the world of dictatorships which are inherently destructive. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely"

Why not "Gay Rights"?
This resolution ensures that people of an alternate lifestyle are not persecuted or discremenated against. (This one is arguably arguable)

"Elimination of Bio Weapons"
The only purpose of bio weapons is destruction, death and suffering. 'Nuff said.

"Legalise Euthanasia"
This resolution forces a nation to give up it's relgious, ethical and moral rights in respect to the value of a human life. It does not define "life threatening illness", many could argue certain mental diseases result in "misery and suffering". It also states "if the person cannot make the decision themselves it would be made by those closest to them on the basis of professional medical advice". What if those closest and medical advice advise death but the patient does not wish it or more to the point when can a patient not make that decision for themselves.

To conclude, this resolution should be repealed.
AoM-DoA

Game mechanics. The moderators won't let such a proposal reach quorum.

It also draws attention to the glaring spelling error in the title of the passed proposal as legalize is spelled "Legalise". I listed it in the same manner to let people know that this proposal is to repeal the same proposal. It's an embarrassment to have such a mistake in the title of an international law!



We do not believe that the question of spelling variations is sufficient reason to reject a proposal, unless the spelling and syntax point to an author who is demonstrably not competent to frame the proposal.

We say this for three reasons:

1. Not everyone who takes part in this game has English as their first language - it is clear that some proposals represent a brave attempt to use a 'foreign' language.

2. We all let typos slip through

3. Many words in the American variant of English differ in spelling from standard English (it is called English, not American) and thus have equal validity to but no more validity than other variations from standard English.

Incidentally, in standard English, legalise is preferred, lagalize is a permitted alternative (see http://www.bartleby.com/68/36/3436.html).

aye Maguro, I agree. Legalizing murder is some grabage. I have just recently resigned from the UN due to its failure to provide for the health and denfense of the world. If your repeal becomes a resolution, I can guarantee mine and several of my fellow nations within my regions to support it.

The grace of God be with your spirit.
- Cefwyn, Christ's humble servant

Grabage????

I honestly think we all could let typos go without a smartass post. Seriously.

the vote was incredibly close, 51-48% more or less. The U.N. has no right to impose this on independant nations it not only denies people of their religion and faith but also their morals and principles.

Nevermoore Wrote
Bunch of babies, all of you. Why didn't you get angry when...
"Citizen Rule Required" passed?
This resolution was passed to ensure all peoples of a nation were represented failrly and equitably with equal power. A side line to this was to help form democratic nations to rid the world of dictatorships which are inherently destructive. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely"

Why not "Gay Rights"?
This resolution ensures that people of an alternate lifestyle are not persecuted or discremenated against. (This one is arguably arguable)

"Elimination of Bio Weapons"
The only purpose of bio weapons is destruction, death and suffering. 'Nuff said.

"Legalise Euthanasia"
This resolution forces a nation to give up it's relgious, ethical and moral rights in respect to the value of a human life. It does not define "life threatening illness", many could argue certain mental diseases result in "misery and suffering". It also states "if the person cannot make the decision themselves it would be made by those closest to them on the basis of professional medical advice". What if those closest and medical advice advise death but the patient does not wish it or more to the point when can a patient not make that decision for themselves.

To conclude, this resolution should be repealed.
AoM-DoA

The point I was trying to make is that all of those resolutions force some sort of law upon the UN nations. Personally we're all for gay rights in Nevermoore, we did not like this elimination of bio weapons or we found a way around citizen rule. You see our congress in nothing but a glorified suggestion box. The concept of euthanasia is simple, if you want to die then it is ok for someone to take you out of your misery. If you've been a vegatable for months then a loved one can make that choice for you.

The resolution is obviously just a guidline to follow, make your own definition and alter the gray areas to suit your nation's needs.

(insert siggy here)

the vote was incredibly close, 51-48% more or less. The U.N. has no right to impose this on independant nations it not only denies people of their religion and faith but also their morals and principles.

That resignation button must be looking very friendly to you then.

Sure now it's old people and vegetables, but then it turns into criminals with life sentences, then people with birth defects or maimed finally whenver somone gets dumped or rejected they will want to be killed. This is wrong, a doctor takes a hypocratic oath to help and treat their patients not kill them off when it looks bad.


indeed I'm comtemplating it...


weapons and rights of gays is one thing, but saying its ok to take the life of somone else is another.

Legalise is the correct spelling in most English-speaking nations, so this is not a typo. Check the Oxford English Dictionary, which is usually cited as the correct dictionary of the English Language. We believe that a person spelling a word according to the form of English spoken in their real-life country should be accepted.

Oh yes, referring to typos, can people stop referring to the Hippocratic oath as the hypocratic oath. A hypocratic oath would require the doctor to do the opposite of what they say.

Let's forget how we spell things in different parts of the world. I personally (as an English person) find it annoying enough that Americanisms are creeping into our language. We must all remember that this is an international game.

I would agree on the law to repeal euthenasia. In the real UN, this would not be a topic for discuss in the forum of international politics. The point of a United Nations is to discuss matters appropriate to the international political forum, which this clearly is not.

The United Nations was a follow-up to the League of Nations, set up post WW1. It's main remit in the real world is international peacekeeping, world health, humanitarian and disaster relief, which some real political leaders would do well to be reminded of.

I live in a country (UK) where old people still die of hypothermia in winter because they cannot afford to heat their homes, and a baby died in my city last year because he as sleeping on a sofa with his parents and fell into the gap behind the cushions. This happened because his home was so cold and damp that the family had to live in one room in winter. Our schools don't have enough books, our so-called National Health Service has waiting lists where people die waiting 2 years for emergency operations, our homeless die on the streets with no way out of their poverty; and yet we as a nation have the arrogance to try and police the globe.

America is the same as we are. People die every day through poverty in the 'land of the free'. In my humble opinion, countries who think they should tell others how they should live their lives should get their own house in order first. Teach by example, build a land where everyone has access to good education, healthcare and housing, then you can feel in a position to comment on the way other nations live their lives.

It's true that this proposal will be deleted because there is no repeal method, so the admin would have to change the game code. However, I think it is possible to modify resolutions, which is the aim of the text I posted here: http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=116069

Hopefully, a more experienced player will come and tell me whether what I have written is permissible, and then I will submit it.

Efte will support that repeal.

You are allowed to make resolutions that might slightly modify past resolutions but not just a proposal that will completely repeal a past resolution

First, Nevermoore, dont ever call me Hippocrite again. You dont even know me.

Second, This is BS! THERE IS AN ISSUE FOR THIS! This kind of topics are too delicate and moral views too different to force all nations to accept any positions. Its valid for all positions.

Third, So, because i believe on freedom i have to accept any garbage that somebody legalize? No way!

Four : My reasons for opssing Euthanassia are simple my reasons. No One, absolutely nobody, has the right to imposse me something.

Five and last : This most be fought. I will attempt to convice my delegate to give his vote to the proposal.

If the fight is lost, then i will resing. Im not gonna legalize it. As pure and simple as that.

Nothing is enforced on you.

Your people are being given a choice.

is it that hard to see?

I have submitted a proposal entitled "Repeal Legalise Euthanasia".

This proposal seeks to undo the recently passed "Legalise Euthanasia" proposal.

It says that the UN will make no laws to determine the right to die laws for member nations.

It also draws attention to the glaring spelling error in the title of the passed proposal as legalize is spelled "Legalise". I listed it in the same manner to let people know that this proposal is to repeal the same proposal. It's an embarrassment to have such a mistake in the title of an international law!

Maguro

Legalise is not a spelling error but merely the UK spelling. Itmay be that the proposer was a Brit. I didnt support the proposal but I just had topoint that out.

Four : My reasons for opssing Euthanassia are simple my reasons. No One, absolutely nobody, has the right to imposse me something.
Did you click the button on your UN membership request? You did? then this passage frim the FAQ applies to you:
So I'm a UN member. Now what?

The UN is your chance to mold the rest of the world to your vision, by voting for resolutions you like and scuttling the rest. However, it's a double-edged sword, because your nation will also be affected by any resolutions that pass. (You can't just obey the resolutions you like and ignore the rest, like real nations do.)
So you see, they DO have the right to impose something on you. So there. Nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah. :wink:

"Laws have been enacted to bring the Kingdom of Schweinfurt into compliance"

I deeply resent being forced to accept euthanasia in my country. This is a matter for individual nations!

I agree with your proposal. We at Wozilioso are against Euthanasia and were very disapointed with the result of the last resolution. We are willing to support you in an attempt to illegalize Euthanasia.

Thanks for submitting this.

I have made a proposal that overturns this and the many other bad resolutions.

Please urge your delegate to support "United Nations Stabilization"!

Browse to the proposal list (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/34598/page=UN_proposal) and use the search box at the bottom of the page to find Stabilization .

MammonLord

So you see, they DO have the right to impose something on you. So there. Nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah. :wink:

Ha! I'm sorry. That wasn't directed at the nation Frisbeeteria was talking to, I just found the 'nyah nyah nyah nyah' thing to be funny.

Meanwhile - I was bummed that euthanasia was legalised. It was close. There was what, 700, 800 votes between the decisions. I think that this was a proposal that should of been made by individual nations, instead of enforcing it upon all nations. It was clear that this topic wasn't something every nation was prepared to embrace even if they voted the other way. Like most of the previous ones.

We support your decision to illegalise euthanasia.

Should point out that you can always ignore the UN...I mean, countries have done so before. I see no reason, for instance, why we should comply with ANY UN law which weakens our arms industries; yet the anti-bioweapons law does just that.

Oh, and I support your decision, simply because the current Legal Euthing law is just legalised Government murder.

"Laws have been enacted to bring the Kingdom of Schweinfurt into compliance"

I deeply resent being forced to accept euthanasia in my country. This is a matter for individual nations!

Joccia has also enacted laws to comply with the wording of the UN resolution(Euthanasia-the answer to mental health, UN forum) we have now solved all of our internal problems. We voted against the proposal but found this way to p*** off the authors. Repeal it if we can, but I doubt the sheep will let us.

Mac Rex

You can't repeal passed resolutions. The proposal has been deleted and I will warn any one else who tries to repeal it, amend it ,whatever, not to. It goes against game mechanics.

Thank You.

Stephanie
Game Moderator

iLock