NationStates Jolt Archive


the arguement against prostitution - counter proposal

Hirota
02-02-2004, 12:56
The democratic states of the Hirota wish to submit the following proposal:

The massive and escalating sexual exploitation of women by local and global sex industries constitutes a fundamental violation of human rights and a barrier to womens equality. Prostitution, sex tourism, trafficking in women, and other practices that reduce women to sexual commodities have had a particularly devastating impact on women in developing countries and oppressed groups of women in so called developed countries. The sexual exploitation of any woman is cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment that establishes the standard of treatment for all women and is incompatible with the inherent dignity and worth of the human person. No existing international human rights instruments adequately address the problem of sexual exploitation.

Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the equal and unalienable rights of all members of the human family without distinction as to sex is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world,

Recognizing that those rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person,

Concerned that human rights are seriously threatened by the massive and growing sexual exploitation of women and children, Recognizing that women have the right to sexual integrity and autonomy,

Recognizing further that sexual exploitation, including prostitution, abrogates these rights and subordinates women as a group, and therefore violates human dignity and the right of equality,

Concerned that sexual exploitation inflicts grave harm and often takes the extreme forms of sexual slavery, torture, mutilation and death, Concerned that sexual violence and prostitution are not inevitable but are forms of sexual exploitation,

Recognizing that the sexual exploitation of any woman is the sexual degradation of all women, deprives women of freedom of movement, and threatens women's safety and security, thus creating the conditions of sexual terrorism,

Concerned that human sexual exploitation, including prostitution, has increasingly become an integral part of national practices which have deprived women of their human rights, Considering that there is no convention presently in existence which addresses sexual exploitation of adults, Recognizing the need for a new convention that will affirm and expand the definition of sexual exploitation which includes violence against women and prostitution as a violation of human rights,

Would propose, in principal:

Article 1
It is a fundamental right to be free from sexual exploitation. States member states take all necessary measures to eliminate all forms of sexual exploitation. The violation and harm of sexual exploitation is not obviated by the consent of the victim.

Article 2
Sexual exploitation is the sexual violation of a person's human dignity, equality, and physical and mental integrity. It is a practice by which some people (primarily men) achieve power and domination over others (primarily women and children) for the purposes of sexual gratification, financial gain, and/or advancement

Article 3
For the purpose of the proposal, sexual exploitation takes the forms of, but is not limited to sexual violence and murder; sexual abuse and torture including sadistic, mutilating practices; genital mutilation; prostitution, sex trafficking, sex tourism and mail order bride markets; rape, incest, sexual harassment and pornography; involuntary sterilization and childbearing; female seclusion, dowry and bride price; temporary marriage or marriage of convenience for the purpose of sexual exploitation.

Article 4
1. Member States shall take into account that certain groups of women and children are rendered particularly vulnerable to sexual exploitation: those of ethnic minority and indigenous status; those subjected to racial discrimination; those in the migrating process; workers in the free trade zones; those in the sex entertainment industry; and those with disabilities that are physical and mental.
2. Member States shall take into account that certain situations render certain groups of women and children more vulnerable to sexual exploitation: armed conflict and military occupation and presence; natural catastrophe; economic development; poverty; incarceration and detention; institutional care; child sexual abuse and domestic violence, forced and child marriages; homelessness and refugee conditions.

Article 5
1. Member States will initiate preventive policies and practices to prevent all forms of sexual exploitation and agree to:
a) Reject state economic policies and practices of development that help precipitate persons into situations of sexual exploitation;
b) Ensure that valid written contracts of employment are entered into and that existing labour laws protect migrant workers, monitoring the provisions of such contracts in order to protect these workers from sexual exploitation in the host country;
c) Enact or enforce such regulations, as the right to retain one's own passport or travel documents, that are necessary for the protection of persons in the migrating process at places of departure, arrival and while en route;
d) Monitor public transportation and port facilities for the presence of persons who appear to be principals, accomplices and customers engaged in prostitution and trafficking and to protect the victims of prostitution and trafficking;
e) Adopt special provisions to prevent the sexual exploitation of persons during all situations of armed conflict. In refugee camps and evacuation centers, Member States will appoint a special team of observers to prevent and monitor violations of sexual exploitation.
2. Member States will provide those most vulnerable to sexual exploitation (as specified in Article 4) and victims of sexual exploitation with:
a) Educational programs and work to increase their economic opportunities and enhance their status and worth;
b) Shelter and housing assistance;
c) Voluntary and confidential counselling and medical services, particularly for prevention, treatment of sexually transmitted diseases, HIV and AIDS, and substance abuse.

Article 6
Member States shall punish perpetrators of sexual exploitation and redress the harm done to victims by developing penal, civil, labour and administrative sanctions.

Article 7
1. Member States shall reject any policy or law that legitimizes the prostitution of anyone and that renders lawful or regulates prostitution in any way, including as a profession, an occupation or as sex entertainment.
2. Member States will adopt appropriate legislation that recognizes prostitution as a form of sexual exploitation by:
a) Punishing anyone who procures, entices or leads away by any means, a person for prostitution, even with that person's consent; anyone who knowingly keeps, manages or finances or takes part in the financing of a brothel; and knowingly lets or rents a building or other place for the purpose of prostitution;
b) Penalizing customers who promote the demand for the prostitution of others, while rejecting any form of the penalization of the prostitute;
c) Punishing their military personnel and affiliated civilian personnel, whether on home territory or outside the country, for any involvement (whether as a customer, financier, manager or procurer) in the prostitution of others;
d) Repealing criminal or civil penalties, where they exist, against the victims of sexual exploitation and prostitution.

Article 8
1. Member States shall adopt measures to prohibit the trafficking in women and children for the purpose of sexual exploitation.
2. Member States recognize that certain types of work in the migrating process, such as sex entertainment and domestic labour, are conducive to sexual exploitation and may lead to sex trafficking and prostitution.
3. Member States shall provide victims of trafficking with assistance to prosecute their perpetrators and to obtain redress and restitution. Aliens shall be entitled to the same means of redress as nationals.
4. Member States shall grant refuge, refugee or asylum status and protection, or repatriation of those who desire to be repatriated, to victims of trafficking, whether they have entered the country legally or illegally.
5. Under no circumstances can States construe this article to prevent women from migrating or travelling abroad.

Article 9
Member States agree to prohibit, penalize and sanction individuals and enterprises, including customers, who organize, profit from, or engage in sex tourism. Such measures shall be adopted and implemented in both the sending and receiving countries of the offenders.

Article 10
Member States shall prohibit and punish persons or enterprises who promote, profit from, or engage in any business involving the matching of women in marriage to foreign nationals by mail order or pseudo-marriage.

Article 11
Member States will penalize the producers, sellers, and distributors of pornography, recognizing that the pornography industry promotes, enlarges the demand for, and is actively engaged in sexual exploitation.

Article 12
Member States shall hold their representatives, diplomatic officials, peacekeeping forces, and related personnel criminally and civilly liable for sexual exploitation, including prostitution.

Article 13
Member States shall punish any person or any organization that hires workers, including migrant workers, for the purpose of sexual exploitation.

Article 14
1. In any legal action, Member States shall insure that victims' history of prostitution, and/or status as illegal alien or stateless person, cannot be used against them. It is an aggravating circumstance and not a defence that the perpetrator of sexual exploitation is a relative or employer of the victim. Honour shall not be used to defend against any act of sexual exploitation, violence or murder.
2. Previous conviction in foreign states for offences referred to in the present Convention will be taken into account as permitted by domestic legislation, for the purpose of:
a) Establishing recidivism;
b) Disqualifying the offender from the exercise of civil rights;

Article 15
1. The offences referred to shall be regarded as extraditable offences in any extradition treaty which has been or may hereafter be concluded between any of the Member States to this Convention.
2. Member States who do not make extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty shall henceforth recognize the offences referred to in this Proposal as cases for extradition between themselves.
3. The extradition will be granted in accordance with the legislation of the State to which the request is made.
4. The nationals of a State whose domestic law does not allow their extradition and who have returned home after committing abroad any of the offences in this Convention shall be prosecuted in and punished by the Courts of their own States. This provision is not mandatory if, in a similar case between the Member States, the extradition of an alien cannot be granted.

Article 16
Member States shall establish or maintain a service charged with the coordination and centralization of the results of the investigation of offences referred to in the present Proposal.
Such services should compile all information calculated to facilitate the prevention and punishment of the offences referred to in the present proposal and should be in close contact with the corresponding services in other Nations.

http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/hirota.jpgThe Democratic States of Hirota (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_nation/nation=hirota)
02-02-2004, 14:34
We cannot replace one resolution with another. :cry: And, there is currently no way to repeal a proposal, either. :cry:
BastardSword
02-02-2004, 14:43
While I like the proposal you gave us: its too sexist.
Why are women and children the only ones protected!
Men can be victimized and have domination over the same as men.
Hirota
02-02-2004, 15:49
We cannot replace one resolution with another. And, there is currently no way to repeal a proposal, either.

ok, as I understand this proposal it allows the profession to be legal. How about a proposal which makes it illegal to ...ahem.... "make use" of anyone in this profession? That wouldn't be repealling the previous legislation? Indeed, that would work more successfully than making prostitution illegal - it's not the victims that are the problem, it's the consumers.

While I like the proposal you gave us: its too sexist.
Why are women and children the only ones protected!
Men can be victimized and have domination over the same as men.

Agreed. I would modify this proposal in line with your suggestion.

http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/hirota.jpgThe Democratic States of Hirota (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_nation/nation=hirota)
Baptist People
02-02-2004, 16:54
Here in the Baptist Republic we have legaly changed the definition of prostitution so we can retain our laws against sexual exploitation. If your proposal come up for a vote the baptist republic will support it.
02-02-2004, 17:16
That is a very good proposal. Voof-land fully supports this worthy cause.
*reads it more carefully*
It outlaws Pornography too!?!?

AWESOME!!!

This resolution must be passed!

Voof-land has spoken.
La Habana
02-02-2004, 18:25
La Habanas government will happily and fully support this proposal if it manages to reach quorum, as will our ally, Santiago De Cubana, who also feels very strongly on this issue.
02-02-2004, 18:38
Prostitution is a type of slavery that is compelled on the women in the capitalist society, and, therefore, struggle against prostitution is vital to restore the humane respect of women in the society. In the present societies, poverty, lack of social assistance, legal and practical limitations on the way of women employment and, thus, in the way of their independence, male- chauvinistic attitude and the manner and behavior of men as privileged sex in the society are the causes of prostitution to be established, maintained and spread.
Uprooting the prostitution demands struggle against all of the above causes. Moreover, in order to fight against prostitution, the following undertakings are urgent. The government must support the victims of prostitution economically, and provide educational facilities and employment possibilities for them. Procurers must be prosecuted by law and be punished by severe sentences.
The Communist Republic of Europaland
Berkylvania
02-02-2004, 21:13
Berkylvania
02-02-2004, 21:14
Hirota
03-02-2004, 09:43
we thank our fellow delegates for their support in favour of this proposal. We will be making efforts to continue to garner support on this proposal and will publish it when it has a chance of successfully going to vote.

In addition, any input member states have on improving the proposal are more than welcome.

http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/hirota.jpgThe Democratic States of Hirota (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_nation/nation=hirota)
03-02-2004, 09:47
The Republic of Ithuania, along with any other moral nation, will not support such a vile resolution that has, hidden within its morass, bans on voluntary consensual acts. Further, the Republic of Ithuania formally moves to censure Hirota for his disgusting, absolutely immoral stance on this issue.
Hirota
03-02-2004, 10:05
The Republic of Ithuania, along with any other moral nation, will not support such a vile resolution that has, hidden within its morass, bans on voluntary consensual acts. Further, the Republic of Ithuania formally moves to censure Hirota for his disgusting, absolutely immoral stance on this issue.

oh grow up, that's going to get you absolutely nowhere.

If I was immoral I'd have not made any such proposal. If I was immoral I'd have voted in favour of that exercise in idiocy that was approved. If I was immoral I would blithely accept that the United nations has voted for a resolution which might have some benefits.

Luckily, I'm not immoral. It is you sir, that by preaching immorality that exposes your hypocracy.
____________________
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/hirota.jpgThe Democratic States of Hirota (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_nation/nation=hirota)
03-02-2004, 10:09
The Republic of Ithuania, along with any other moral nation, will not support such a vile resolution that has, hidden within its morass, bans on voluntary consensual acts. Further, the Republic of Ithuania formally moves to censure Hirota for his disgusting, absolutely immoral stance on this issue.

Censure? Censure?!? You who would prattle about the need for the right of free speech and the involvement within the government of its citizens or of nation states in their international bodies would have the gall to declare that he be censured for presenting a proposal?

Vote him down if you do not approve, but if you can prattle on about the rights of the individual, we are equally of rights to present opposing viewpoints. If we are not, then you stand in contempt of your own resolutions, subject to the termination of your membership in this august body.

Think carefully before you spout this dribble, little brother. We do not take well to our sovereignty or anyone else's being so flippantly called into question.

We cannot replace one resolution with another. And, there is currently no way to repeal a proposal, either.

Yes you can, little brother. Make a proposal that states "We hereby repeal this morally reprehensible resolution." Choose an appropriate category and strength to precisely negate its effect and the result will be a null vote in the long run. Your will is accomplished. The previous legislation remains, but is in effect now null.

The votes are all you need.
Googlewoop
03-02-2004, 10:16
Here in the Baptist Republic we have legaly changed the definition of prostitution so we can retain our laws against sexual exploitation. If your proposal come up for a vote the baptist republic will support it.

What a champion idea wot, wot.
03-02-2004, 10:22
The Republic of Ithuania, along with any other moral nation, will not support such a vile resolution that has, hidden within its morass, bans on voluntary consensual acts. Further, the Republic of Ithuania formally moves to censure Hirota for his disgusting, absolutely immoral stance on this issue.

oh grow up, that's going to get you absolutely nowhere.

If I was immoral I'd have not made any such proposal.
Wrong. The immoral act is your intention to violate the rights of individuals to engage in voluntary acts and agreements with each other.
03-02-2004, 10:30
Brothers of Hirota, we of the Holy Empire of Kokablel find that your resolution is more blessedly precise than previous efforts in this vein. However, we also feel that it still defies national sovereignty of individual states, save that it does detail certain aspects of international law that need addressing.

We suggest factoring together the international aspects into a smaller resolution and offering the remainder as suggestions to UN members, along with a separate bill to negate the previously elected resolution concerning prostitution.

We find that these suggestions will prove invaluable in our own legal structure, so long as they mesh well with current international law.
Hirota
03-02-2004, 10:31
The Republic of Ithuania, along with any other moral nation, will not support such a vile resolution that has, hidden within its morass, bans on voluntary consensual acts. Further, the Republic of Ithuania formally moves to censure Hirota for his disgusting, absolutely immoral stance on this issue.

oh grow up, that's going to get you absolutely nowhere.

If I was immoral I'd have not made any such proposal.
Wrong. The immoral act is your intention to violate the rights of individuals to engage in voluntary acts and agreements with each other.

Errrrrrr. no. My intention is to restore the ability of nations to determine their own destiny on matters that are only truly relevant to themselves. Indeed, it could be argued my intention is to restore the rights of soverign nations to determine their own destiny rather than have their rights violated by the idiocy of the UN.

If you want to vote against this you go right ahead and continue to perpetuate the decline of the UN. But personally, I'd like to get the UN back on track making policy on things that really matter.
03-02-2004, 10:34
The Republic of Ithuania, along with any other moral nation, will not support such a vile resolution that has, hidden within its morass, bans on voluntary consensual acts. Further, the Republic of Ithuania formally moves to censure Hirota for his disgusting, absolutely immoral stance on this issue.

oh grow up, that's going to get you absolutely nowhere.

If I was immoral I'd have not made any such proposal.
Wrong. The immoral act is your intention to violate the rights of individuals to engage in voluntary acts and agreements with each other.

Errrrrrr. no. My intention is to restore the ability of nations to determine their own destiny on matters that are only truly relevant to themselves.
Yet you seek to make certain types of consensual, voluntary acts and agreements illegal everywhere.

Indeed, it could be argued my intention is to restore the rights of soverign nations
No nation that violates individual rights has a right to its sovereignty, and other nations are morally permitted (though not obligated) to correct that flagrant abomination.
03-02-2004, 10:38
The Republic of Ithuania, along with any other moral nation, will not support such a vile resolution that has, hidden within its morass, bans on voluntary consensual acts. Further, the Republic of Ithuania formally moves to censure Hirota for his disgusting, absolutely immoral stance on this issue.

oh grow up, that's going to get you absolutely nowhere.

If I was immoral I'd have not made any such proposal.
Wrong. The immoral act is your intention to violate the rights of individuals to engage in voluntary acts and agreements with each other.

Errrrrrr. no. My intention is to restore the ability of nations to determine their own destiny on matters that are only truly relevant to themselves.
Yet you seek to make certain types of consensual, voluntary acts and agreements illegal everywhere.

Indeed, it could be argued my intention is to restore the rights of soverign nations
No nation that violates individual rights has a right to its sovereignty, and other nations are morally permitted (though not obligated) to correct that flagrant abomination.

Ergo, only nations in line with your own ethics are justified in existing, eh little brother? Isn't it lovely that you are not in charge of how the world works and that, were you to begin assaulting peaceful nations who do business in a fashion different to yours, you would be put down like the rabid dog you are.
03-02-2004, 10:42
The Republic of Ithuania, along with any other moral nation, will not support such a vile resolution that has, hidden within its morass, bans on voluntary consensual acts. Further, the Republic of Ithuania formally moves to censure Hirota for his disgusting, absolutely immoral stance on this issue.

oh grow up, that's going to get you absolutely nowhere.

If I was immoral I'd have not made any such proposal.
Wrong. The immoral act is your intention to violate the rights of individuals to engage in voluntary acts and agreements with each other.

Errrrrrr. no. My intention is to restore the ability of nations to determine their own destiny on matters that are only truly relevant to themselves.
Yet you seek to make certain types of consensual, voluntary acts and agreements illegal everywhere.

Indeed, it could be argued my intention is to restore the rights of soverign nations
No nation that violates individual rights has a right to its sovereignty, and other nations are morally permitted (though not obligated) to correct that flagrant abomination.

Ergo, only nations in line with your own ethics are justified in existing, eh little brother? Isn't it lovely that you are not in charge of how the world works and that, were you to begin assaulting peaceful nations who do business in a fashion different to yours, you would be put down like the rabid dog you are.

Only nations who respect an objectively defined set of individual rights are justified in existing, just as only persons who respect an objectively defined set of individual rights are justified in existing. Murderers are executed because they have violated an individual's right to self-ownership; the only difference is one of scale. If you accept that individual criminals should be punished for their crimes, then you must logically accept that nations be punished for their crimes as well.
Hirota
03-02-2004, 10:45
Brothers of Hirota, we of the Holy Empire of Kokablel find that your resolution is more blessedly precise than previous efforts in this vein. However, we also feel that it still defies national sovereignty of individual states, save that it does detail certain aspects of international law that need addressing.

We suggest factoring together the international aspects into a smaller resolution and offering the remainder as suggestions to UN members, along with a separate bill to negate the previously elected resolution concerning prostitution.

We find that these suggestions will prove invaluable in our own legal structure, so long as they mesh well with current international law.

I assume you are talking about the main proposal? I can't really use that as it is in conflict with the recent resolution....

I was thinking of making it illegal to solicit services from a prostitute however (described above), and also making it the domain of the nations police force to persue said crimes (so effectively, if a police force was directed not to persue such crimes by their government then they might be inclined to look the other way)

Basically the idea is to restore control of this "industry" to the induvidual nations, and target the actual problems with prostitution - the clients. No clients, means no prostitution.

I'd urge any nation concerned by the UN acting outside of it's remit to consider supporting this proposal when it is submitted to the UN, and any nation openly against prostitution.
_______________
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/hirota.jpgThe Democratic States of Hirota (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_nation/nation=hirota)
03-02-2004, 10:46
The Republic of Ithuania, along with any other moral nation, will not support such a vile resolution that has, hidden within its morass, bans on voluntary consensual acts. Further, the Republic of Ithuania formally moves to censure Hirota for his disgusting, absolutely immoral stance on this issue.

oh grow up, that's going to get you absolutely nowhere.

If I was immoral I'd have not made any such proposal.
Wrong. The immoral act is your intention to violate the rights of individuals to engage in voluntary acts and agreements with each other.

Errrrrrr. no. My intention is to restore the ability of nations to determine their own destiny on matters that are only truly relevant to themselves.
Yet you seek to make certain types of consensual, voluntary acts and agreements illegal everywhere.

Indeed, it could be argued my intention is to restore the rights of soverign nations
No nation that violates individual rights has a right to its sovereignty, and other nations are morally permitted (though not obligated) to correct that flagrant abomination.

Ergo, only nations in line with your own ethics are justified in existing, eh little brother? Isn't it lovely that you are not in charge of how the world works and that, were you to begin assaulting peaceful nations who do business in a fashion different to yours, you would be put down like the rabid dog you are.

Only nations who respect an objectively defined set of individual rights are justified in existing, just as only persons who respect an objectively defined set of individual rights are justified in existing. Murderers are executed because they have violated an individual's right to self-ownership; the only difference is one of scale. If you accept that individual criminals should be punished for their crimes, then you must logically accept that nations be punished for their crimes as well.

And repeated invasions into their right to self-rule, especially to veiled and enacted threats upon their national integrity without sufficient justification qualify as punisheable actions, causing one to be put down like the rabid dog they are.

You declared the right to have this individual nation censured for stating a position in opposition to yours. Either you defy the right of free speech of governments and are subject to censure yourself, or your are simply to inflamed with your own self-righteous indignation to notice the terrible hypocrisy you have presented.

He has presented a position to take before the UN. When and if it appears before you, vote it down and lobby against it. To deny him the right to speak is unjust according to the laws you helped to establish.
03-02-2004, 10:52
Brothers of Hirota, we of the Holy Empire of Kokablel find that your resolution is more blessedly precise than previous efforts in this vein. However, we also feel that it still defies national sovereignty of individual states, save that it does detail certain aspects of international law that need addressing.

We suggest factoring together the international aspects into a smaller resolution and offering the remainder as suggestions to UN members, along with a separate bill to negate the previously elected resolution concerning prostitution.

We find that these suggestions will prove invaluable in our own legal structure, so long as they mesh well with current international law.

I assume you are talking about the main proposal? I can't really use that as it is in conflict with the recent resolution....

I was thinking of making it illegal to solicit services from a prostitute however (described above), and also making it the domain of the nations police force to persue said crimes (so effectively, if a police force was directed not to persue such crimes by their government then they might be inclined to look the other way)

Basically the idea is to restore control of this "industry" to the induvidual nations, and target the actual problems with prostitution - the clients. No clients, means no prostitution.

I'd urge any nation concerned by the UN acting outside of it's remit to consider supporting this proposal when it is submitted to the UN, and any nation openly against prostitution.
_______________
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/hirota.jpgThe Democratic States of Hirota (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_nation/nation=hirota)

We apologize for the confusion. We of the Holy Empire of Kokablel do not have an issue in this regard. Control of the industry is in the hands of the government. According to UN stipulations, there is nothing which negates the right of nations to subsist through non-capitalist economical models. We of the Holy Empire always have been and always will be a managed economy, with no private industry whatsoever.

In essence, the current resolution just added one more job for us to regulate. Also, considering that service industry positions are paid almost universally equal and low wages (save in cases of skilled labor), prostitution is noted as not being a terribly beneficial occupation. We have found that through simple economics of our nation, we have a very low occurence of the practice, as no one truly sees a burning desire to enter into the field. There are better paying jobs and easier and more fulfilling jobs of equal pay and benefits and no lack of positions in these.

We expect this situation will continue indefinitely.
03-02-2004, 10:55
Once again, you are evading logic.

Just as a criminal has given up his right to self-rule when he commits a crime by violating the rights of another individual (how else could his arrest and detention be justified?), so has a nation given up its right to self-rule when it violates the rights of its citizens. And just as one individual threatening to violate the rights of another is itself a violation of the rights of that individual, so is a nation's threatening to violate the rights of its citizens, regardless of the form that threat may take, itself a violation of the rights of its citizens.
03-02-2004, 11:03
Once again, you are evading logic.

Just as a criminal has given up his right to self-rule when he commits a crime by violating the rights of another individual (how else could his arrest and detention be justified?), so has a nation given up its right to self-rule when it violates the rights of its citizens. And just as one individual threatening to violate the rights of another is itself a violation of the rights of that individual, so is a nation's threatening to violate the rights of its citizens, regardless of the form that threat may take, itself a violation of the rights of its citizens.

He has violated no rights, but has presented a dissenting opinion.

You point your guns prematurely, aiming them at whoever disagrees with you. Is the point of a barrel declaring the rights of individuals as you take them from one and give them to another your only form of argument? Is this what it means to be truly 'liberal?'

Perhaps we are truly as right as we thought regarding liberal thought, decrying it so openly. When they have the gun in their hands, they are little better than thugs, threatening conformity to their whims at the mere mention of a disagreement, and one that was hardly all against your position. There was much you would likely have agreed with had you read carefully.
03-02-2004, 11:08
Can you not read?

He has not yet violated individual rights (well, that's probably not true, but as far as this issue is concerned he hasn't yet), but the text of this bill clearly indicates that he intends to.

If I were to threaten to kill you, I would be arrested--and justly so, because my threat to violate your right of self-ownership is in and of itself a violation of your rights. Similarly, since the text of this bill is clearly a threat on the part of Hirota to violate the rights of not just his own citizens but those throughout the world by instituting an international ban on certain types of consensual activities, proposing the bill (thus making a threat) constitutes in and of itself a violation of the rights of individuals the world over.
Googlewoop
03-02-2004, 11:08
This is a retelling of events which occured just recently in the General Assembly after even more valuable and important nations resigned in protest.

Googlewoop's representitive, Mr. Tea and Coffee Anan stabds to aplaud the exiting delegates and then turns towards the neatral secretary general to speek. The rest of the assembly, even the rouge nations making a mockery of the UN fall silent as the respected elder clears his throat. He starts to speek in his old, husky, 'Proffessor Dumbledore' voice.

"Ladis and gentlemen of the United Nations. Myself and the Government I represent also must agree with my noble colegues who have been forced from our halls. I cannot accept this irresposnible act of obscenity in our organisation. I WILL NOT STAND FOR IT!"

The whole assembly jumps at this out of character temper. Tea and Coffee Anans voice rises to a spectacular deafening cresendo.

"I WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS! YOOOOOU CANNOT STAND FOR THIS! THESE CHILDISH IIIIIDIOT ARE MAKING A MOCKERY OF OUR SYSTEM! THEY ARE IMMATURE, IMMORAL AND OBSCENE! DO YOU NOT GET IT! THEY DON'T CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO OUR UNITED NATIONS! THEY FORCE OUR SYSTEM BEYOND ITS MANDATES AND CONTROLLS,"

(Here his voise rose even louder to a pitch that sounden more like a goods train than a man)

"FOR CHEAP THRILLS AND LAUGHS! JUST SO THAT THEY CAN HAVE A GOOD CHUUUUUCKLE WHEN UNWANTED PROSTITUTES BEGIN TO POP UP EVERY WHERE! THEY ARE SEX STARVED, UNDERAGE, DESPERATE LITTLE TWITS! THEY ARE FORCING THE REST OF THE WORLD TO BELIEVE THAT OUR HALLOWED HALLS ARE A PLACE FOR MEDDLING IN SEXUAL OBSCENITIES, THE OCCULT AND EVEN WORSE,"

His voice rises again so that veins on his tall cheek bone stand out. It is obviouse now he cannot yell any louder than this. No man can. Some members cover their ears.

"MEEEEEDLING WITH PEEEEEOOOOOPLES LIVES!!!!!"

Suddenly, Mr. Anans voice is normal again as if nothing has happened.

"Not only can we not morally allow this disgusting display of childish fun to continue, we can not LEGALLY allow it to continue."

He points a long bony, wrinkled finger at the original proposer of the legislation, the leader of the trouble makers who, even thou he is visibly shaken, is sitting with a smugg grin on his face.

"The UN does NOT have the power to change the internal affairs of a nation. THATS RIGHT YOU MEDDLESOME FOOL, NO MATTER HOW MANY PEOPLE THINK SO< YOUR LEGISLATION IS NOT LEEEEEGAL!

Wheez...Cough

And Myself and my government refuse straight out to follow it.

Regrestfully collegues, unless something is done to stop this disgusting behaviour, I MEAN SOMETHING WITH WEIGHT LIKE A RESOLUTION, I too will have to excuse myself from this assembly."

A gasp of horror sweeps over the assembly which grows louder as the traslations come through.

"Thats right fellow representitives, I WILL LEAVE!"

These last words echo around the hall and a whimper from an elderly delegate can be heard clearly as the United Nations has not been without the thoughtfull, outgoing voice of the Googlewooper representitive for a very, very long time. It is perhaps a measure of how much Tea and Coffee Anan is respected and valued in the assembly.

"Now I am currently working among others to have such an ammendment made and I implore you all to endorse it whole hartedly. But if it is NOT succesfull, I WILL make good my threat and resign."

Mr. Anan sits and amongst the resounding applause from the majority of the assembly and the pleading from many other elderly delegates and stares accross the gigantic round chamber at the leader of the trouble makers. Under the wise old man's sgaze, the impudent fool's smug mood melts and the grin is replaced by a open mouthed look of absolute shock and miscomprehension.

And so began the protest of Googlewoop and the uproar cased by Mr. Anans threat to leave.
Googlewoop
03-02-2004, 11:10
After listening to this debate for quite some time, our UN delegation and in turn government announce that they now have an unquestionable support and respect for the spokespeople of Ithuania.
03-02-2004, 11:15
*Ambassador the UN from Illaria stands abruptly*
Gentlemen! Ladies! Please, this is a discussion, not a flowery stage for overworked dramatics.

The issue at hand being addressed by all is the legislation on prostitution. The actions of Ithuania in defense of the UN were what they were. Motive interpretation is left to individual nations.

The opposition to the legislation must be reasoned and purposeful, emotional mob mentalities are the same thing that got Athens sacked a few times.
03-02-2004, 11:18
Can you not read?

He has not yet violated individual rights (well, that's probably not true, but as far as this issue is concerned he hasn't yet), but the text of this bill clearly indicates that he intends to.

If I were to threaten to kill you, I would be arrested--and justly so, because my threat to violate your right of self-ownership is in and of itself a violation of your rights. Similarly, since the text of this bill is clearly a threat on the part of Hirota to violate the rights of not just his own citizens but those throughout the world by instituting an international ban on certain types of consensual activities, proposing the bill (thus making a threat) constitutes in and of itself a violation of the rights of individuals the world over.

(*yawns* enough of this. As amusing as you are to banter with, I need sleep.)

Oh, we read quite clearly. Your obsession with all that is 'consensual' and does 'no harm' seems quite clear to us. Your nation seems bent upon trampling upon sovereign rights of other nations. The 9,000+ votes of your brethren in this august assemblage are unworthy of their rights to charter and must be struck down like the heathen hoardes they are. That one of them would even consider presenting a clearer bill that included an indictment of your standpoint is grounds for his being locked up.

Further, I notice that you seem convinced that capitalism is the only path. Anyone who obeys another economical model must fall under your ban too. We, of the Holy Empire of Kokablel find it intensely amusing that despite our rigorous and strict lifestyles and beliefs and our belief that your ruinous proposals will tear your nation assunder one day, we are the ones who do not demand immediate kneeling in obeissance to our viewpoint. We are patient with our brethren, where you cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.

And they call us extremists. What delicious irony.
Hirota
03-02-2004, 11:19
Can you not read?

He has not yet violated individual rights (well, that's probably not true, but as far as this issue is concerned he hasn't yet), but the text of this bill clearly indicates that he intends to.

If I were to threaten to kill you, I would be arrested--and justly so, because my threat to violate your right of self-ownership is in and of itself a violation of your rights. Similarly, since the text of this bill is clearly a threat on the part of Hirota to violate the rights of not just his own citizens but those throughout the world by instituting an international ban on certain types of consensual activities, proposing the bill (thus making a threat) constitutes in and of itself a violation of the rights of individuals the world over.

Please tell me where any of the draft articles proposed violate human rights...because I fail to see how my original proposal violates any rights. Indeed it affirms them in my opinion....Like I said "The massive and escalating sexual exploitation of women by local and global sex industries constitutes a fundamental violation of human rights and a barrier to womens equality."
03-02-2004, 11:21
*Ambassador the UN from Illaria stands abruptly*
Gentlemen! Ladies! Please, this is a discussion, not a flowery stage for overworked dramatics.

The issue at hand being addressed by all is the legislation on prostitution. The actions of Ithuania in defense of the UN were what they were. Motive interpretation is left to individual nations.

The opposition to the legislation must be reasoned and purposeful, emotional mob mentalities are the same thing that got Athens sacked a few times.

They threatened war and censure for statement of position. We responded as was appropriate according to current international law.

Goodnight gentlemen and ladies.
03-02-2004, 11:22
Oh, we read quite clearly. Your obsession with all that is 'consensual' and does 'no harm' seems quite clear to us. Your nation seems bent upon trampling upon sovereign rights of other nations.
Once again, just like an individual who violates the rights of others relinquishes his rights, so does a nation that violates the rights of its citizens relinquish its rights. The only difference is one of scale; the same principle applies.
03-02-2004, 11:28
Please tell me where any of the draft articles proposed violate human rights...because I fail to see how my original proposal violates any rights. Indeed it affirms them in my opinion....Like I said "The massive and escalating sexual exploitation of women by local and global sex industries constitutes a fundamental violation of human rights and a barrier to womens equality."

Unfortunately, your saying so does not make it so. Among other things, it intends to institute an outright ban on prostitution (even if all involved consent), sex tourism and trafficking (even if all involved consent), genital mutilation (even if all involved consent), pornography (even if all involved consent), temporary/convenience marriage (even if all involved consent), mail-order brides (even if all involved consent), and various other sexual activities that are not inherently coercive. While the proposal also addresses such inherently coercive activities as rape, murder, and the ilk, the fact that it also bans certain forms of sexual activitiy that are NOT inherently coercive regardless of whether or not all parties involved consent means that this bill, if passed, would constitute a flagrant violation of individual rights.
03-02-2004, 11:41
Contrary to popular belief, prostitution is a form of employment. A form of self-employment, yes, but employment nonetheless. Rape is a form of sexual exploitation, as are sexual manipulation, the performance of underage sexual acts, or mental abuse resulting in sexual slavery. Prostitution is an act and decision made by a consenting adult, for reasons of their own.

As with any career, it is simply the use of a particular talent to one's advantage. Are lawyers being told they do not have the basic right to make a living from what they enjoy, and that which they are good at? No, and it will never be the case. Sexual intercourse or sexual acts between consenting adults is not illegal.

Despite misleading information being presented, acts involved in prostitution are rarely committed in a public area. Therefore, without it being disrespectful to the public, and without it breaking any existing laws regarding sexual acts, what basis is there for prostitution to be made illegal.

What's more, a woman (or a man for that matter) will choose this profession because it is the most appealing option available to them. Prostitution is, above all, a personal decision involving only the interests of one person, and those who make use of the services provided. It is, in no way, exploitation if the person involved is consenting.
03-02-2004, 11:48
What grounds does the UN have to establish moral codes in individual nations? Can the UN choose which industries each nation pursues? If you're going to reduce prostitution to solely the issue of economic practicality, then the relevance of the UN on this issue is again in question.