NationStates Jolt Archive

As it is defined in the proposal it is simple a way to commit a hate crime legally and to openly discriminate against Homosexual and Bi-sexual persons. This Proposal defines "sodomy" to only be sexual acts by two men. This person is Obviously Uneducated of has a poor grasp of language. "Sodomy" is any sexual act not designiated for procreation. Therefore to be properly worded it should ban oral and anal sex regardless of gender or gender identity. As this is also a Proposal design and states it is religious based the need to research there own religion better and come to realize that not all of those in the world are of the same faith. Though we in Malagonia are principly christian We do not impose the mores of our principle faith on those who are not. We also believe that sexuality is between the individual and their creator.

Ban Sodomy
A resolution to restrict civil freedoms in the interest of moral decency.


Category: Moral Decency Strength: Mild Proposed by: Southern Arcadalia
Description: In the interest of all the peoples of the world and with the intent of making major cuts in transmission rates of Sexually Tansmitted Infections, creating a morally cleaner world for our children, and spreading the Gospel to all peoples of the world,
We, the nations of the NationStates United Nations, do hereby ban Sodomy, defined as homosexual sexual intercourse, with in our borders.


This kind of flies in the face of the UN resolutions "Sexual Freedoms" and "Gay Rights" doesn't it?

By psssing the 40 hour workweek resolution the U.N. ignored the freedom of contract (the freedom of people to do as they wish so long as all parties consent) to forward a specific ideology... This resolution does the exact same thing.. albeit with a different ideology :).

By psssing the 40 hour workweek resolution the U.N. ignored the freedom of contract (the freedom of people to do as they wish so long as all parties consent) to forward a specific ideology... This resolution does the exact same thing.. albeit with a different ideology :).

I didn't support the "40 Hour Work Week" either. :D

Though I'd obviously oppose such a measure, it doesn't actually contradict either of the aforementioned resolutions:

What goes on between two (or more) consenting adults in the privacy of their homes should not be the concern of the state unless it is neccesary to enquire about the afore mentioned activities for medical reasons (e.g. if the individuals wish to give blood etc.).

The case could easily be made that he's doing just that - by the text of the resolution it even explains that it's a medically-based resolution.

WHEREAS it has been clearly witnessed there is an outspoken minority who wish to oppress gays. We, the People's Republic of Kundu and the other peoples of the world wishing for the preservation of freedom and the respect of all hereby resolve that all member nations of the United Nations must pass laws protecting people from discrimination in all parts of life. We also resolve that gay marriages be protected and endorsed by law in the member nations.

The proposal doesn't outlaw gay marriage, merely gay intercourse... As to the "discrimination" clause, it's vague enough as to be unclear. If I wanted to I could make an argument that the resolution he presents ISN'T discriminatory.

That said, I don't agree with it, but I don't think there's a prayer it would pass, so it's kind of irrelevant complaining about it.

Marriage is by definition a liscence to fuck amongst other things.

As it is defined in the proposal it is simple a way to commit a hate crime legally and to openly discriminate against Homosexual and Bi-sexual persons. This Proposal defines "sodomy" to only be sexual acts by two men. This person is Obviously Uneducated of has a poor grasp of language. "Sodomy" is any sexual act not designiated for procreation. Therefore to be properly worded it should ban oral and anal sex regardless of gender or gender identity. As this is also a Proposal design and states it is religious based the need to research there own religion better and come to realize that not all of those in the world are of the same faith. Though we in Malagonia are principly christian We do not impose the mores of our principle faith on those who are not. We also believe that sexuality is between the individual and their creator.

A great politican once said, "it is not the government's business to regulate what goes on in people's bedrooms", and we wholeheartedly stand by that. This proposal does not have our support.

Hello trend-setters, you may remember me from such threads as "WHy Gay Rights Are Already Protected And ... " or something like that ... In fact, after this, I am going to go and bump it up for good measure.

Let the games begin, :D



Ban Sodomy

A resolution to restrict civil freedoms in the interest of moral decency.

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Southern Arcadalia

Description: In the interest of all the peoples of the world and with the intent of making major cuts in transmission rates of Sexually Tansmitted Infections, creating a morally cleaner world for our children, and spreading the Gospel to all peoples of the world,
We, the nations of the NationStates United Nations, do hereby ban Sodomy, defined as homosexual sexual intercourse, with in our borders.

Myrth ? Hack ? Any-body clocked on ? I say to you, " Good Hunting " !

This kind of flies in the face of the UN resolutions "Sexual Freedoms" and "Gay Rights" doesn't it?

Certainly does, and here is why :

For this bit,

Description: In the interest of all the peoples of the world and with the intent of making major cuts in transmission rates of Sexually Tansmitted Infections

Some-body mentioned how there was a loop hole in the "Sexual Freedom" act, in that the line :

Unless it is neccesary to enquire about the afoe-mentioned activities for medical reasons.

As you can see where I used bolding, the state may only enquire, they can do so all they like I suppose, provided it does not breech any other set In. law regarding your rights, but hell if they'll be allowed to stop it ( Sodomy. :)

creating a morally cleaner world for our children, and spreading the Gospel to all peoples of the world,

1) blah blah blah blah blah.

2) This clause actually violates the "Relgious Tolerance" act, where it has the lines,

Therefore let is be resolved that the United Nations support and promote a greater understanding of all religions

See the bolding, cause this promotes only a religion derived from the "Gospel"

* ( Insert my smug smile here )

And the clear to see killer punch line,

We, the nations of the NationStates United Nations, do hereby ban Sodomy, defined as homosexual sexual intercourse, with in our borders.

And that folks, is against both the "Sexual Freedom" act and the "Gay Rights" resolution.

Must pass laws protecting people from discrimination in all parts of life.

Bless, double bless, and "

What goes on between two (or more) consenting adults in the privacy of their homes should not be the concern of the state.

I rest my case, unless some one who supports the anti-sodomy proposal thinks they can do one better ...

You see, if I was not so modest, I would have said,

"Darn'd I'm Good ! :D "

Yes, with the exact same cheesey grin. :wink:

- T.R. Kom
Le Représentant de Komokom.
Ministre Régional de Substance.
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/komokom.jpg (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/24401/page=display_nation)
<- Not A Moderator, Just A Know It All.
" Clowns To The Left of Me ... Jokers To The Right, Here I am ... "

We can not support a ban on sodomy any more than we can support a ban on prayer. This is not a subject that the Militant Mercantile Alliance of Greenspoint feels that the UN should even be addressing...

James Moehlman
Asst. Mgr. ico UN Affairs
The Militant Mercantile Alliance of Greenspoint

"Minister Orthmann, there's this proposal that wants to ban sodomy..."

"Ban sodomy? Well, we can't have that. My wife would throw a fit."

"No, no, Minister, they're defining it to mean only homosexual sexual intercourse."

PDK Orthmann scratched his head. "Um. Is it technically possible for a homosexual couple to have sexual intercourse? Surely it would be classified as - "

"No, Minister, but I don't think they understand that. They're Christians, you see. They think it'll spread the Gospels, or something."

"Well, I know whenever I'm in the sack I always think to myself, 'You know, Philip Diogenes Karamazov, if only I wasn't getting laid right now I could be sitting and reading the Bible.'"

Ass sex is great! whether it's homo, hetro or just plain porn. Our point is who gives a shit about what happens inside the home of free thinking individuals?! As long as it is consentual and does not endanger the life of someone(sp) Good god what would the world come to if the thought police came in and arrested me for a sex crime of consentual sodomy with my wife! And if I let my kid watch my wife and I have sex than please lock me away for life! That has to be the most ridiculous argument I have ever seen! "keeping our children in a positive moralistic environment" or some nonesense like that. If your child watches you having sex and you condone that; then you have many more issues than just sodomy to deal with.

Why does this issue have to come to homosexuals ...AGAIN?! you idiots that have a problem with people making other people happy even if it is not YOUR idea of happiness are oppressive rights mongers! Do you really think that a man or woman wake up one day and say "Hey cock sounds really good to me today I think I'll become a male gay!" Or " Hey I liked that guy last night but I don't know I just need to be a lesbian for awhile p**sy sounds great I think I'll become a lesbian." these are not inherant choices this is the way some people just are so let them be and unless they are trying to kill you then let them live their lives the way they see fit. Nobody has passed legislation yet that impedes your right to be ignorant and stupid have they? well then... I'm spent!

The right to be gay, lesbian, or bisexual is protected by the UN.

Giordano,
Assistant UN representative,
The Black New World
This was a standard response.
Meet The Reps (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=132588)