NationStates Jolt Archive

I looked at the votes against the current UN proposal, and was surprised to see that one of the moderators, Tactical Grace, had voted against the measure. No offense to Tactical Grace or any mods, but I am quite stunned, as I thought the only people to vote against such a measure would be either quite evil, or joking around. I just did not expect a mod to take such a position. Is there a philosophical disagreement, I wonder?

Disclaimer: This thread is not meant to insult any nations, or any moderators, including but not limited to Tactical Grace.

Just guess there are some people here who we don't quite understand...and who quite don't understand compassion. Perhaps we should take some voters to be circumcised in such a way to see if they like it? People need to show compassion, ignoring cultural or religious parameters - in the end, Humans end up causing suffering because of ignorance, so we must end female genital mutilation. Anyway, on the topic of democracy, if the countries cruely circumcising are meant to be democratic, where is the democracy? And, wouldn't this circumcision also prove there are degenerate sexist Humans? I don't mean to offend any mods, but I expect more highly of those in charge. I'm sorry, but if they have any shred of decency in them, they'll vote to end female genital mutilation. We can not accept anything else, or respect anything else - or understand anything else. We must not betray our own species. Save these women. Do it now, or Humanity and our children will hold the guilt too...perhaps forever. Do we want to leave that kind of world for our children? Do we want to suffer? Vote to end female genital mutilation, or forever be a guilty Human who has no good side to show Humanity. We need to end suffering, not cause it. Humanity has caused enough trouble already without causing more.

One must realize, however, that certain governments may follow different religions and ideologies and morals than we, who properly voted for banning FGM. While I find the practice of FGM abhorrent and disgusting, I still respect the decision of UN Member Nations to believe in it.
However, I look forward for the resolution to be approved and these nations to be forced to abide by our proper morals.
-His Most Holy Emperor Poor, Emperor of Porovia

Just guess there are some people here who we don't quite understand...and who quite don't understand compassion.

Until you know why Tactical Grace voted against it maybe you should withhold judgement. As a mod Tactical Grace has a right to an opinion outside the role of a moderator, As a delegate Tactical Grace may have a duty to vote in accordance with the opinions of the rest of the region.

If I listed all the reasons Tactical Grace could have voted against the current resolution I'd be hear all night…

Let's just say that there's no point in arguing against something when you don't know what's going on.

Giordano,
UN representative,
The Black New World
Meet The Reps (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=132588) ~ What can the UN do and what can it do for me?
(http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=132588)

Some girls get off on practicing crazy stuff like that. I think it would limit sexual expression if we were to force a stop to it. I do not think that performing acts of this nature on unwilling females is acceptible, but if they want to perform them on themselves, we, as their governments, should not limit their freedoms. For this reason, I am voting against this proposal.

Please discuss this issue on the main thread only- http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=150189

Giordano,
UN representative,
The Black New World
Meet The Reps (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=132588) ~ What can the UN do and what can it do for me?
(http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=132588)

Er, aren't we forgetting the third party? Those who suffer? What makes people think that just because there is a different religion means we have to respect their choices all the time? We ignore all suffering here, and, well, let's just wait and see what happens. Let's see how those suffering feel. Yes, people have reasons, you're right - but those reasons aren't always good or bad. I have a simple question that tips the balance - how would you like to be treated this way? Held down against your will, brutally treated, everything democracy stands for gone, and those who love you mutilate you? Wouldn't you want some limits to your religion that mean they have to see whether you want something done or not? I suffer a lot in real life because of certain things, and I damn well know that I wouldn't ignore the suffering of others which causes that suffering. I know that they suffer, and that there is something wrong going on. Sure, some people might seek justification, but I can not and will not condone such mutilation. See it the way I ask you that question. I mean no disrespect to religion, just, with all due respect, in the modern world there is no place to hold someone down, brutally treat them, and mutilate them. It is sick. It is sad. And if anyone has anything against me, okay, but just answer that question with a yes or a no, and go no further with me.

The question again = How would you like to be treated this way? Held down against your will, brutally treated, everything democracy stands for gone, and those who love you mutilate you? Wouldn't you want some limits to your religion that mean they have to see whether you want something done or not? And, if people ignore it because it is another ideology, would you feel betrayed when they could help you, but they withhold that ability because they don't feel what you feel?

No further debate against me, just a yes or a no to that question. Even telegram me or whatever. Or answer it off-screen. Yes, off-screen, that way, don't reply to ME, just to others. I just have that question, but it isn't a topic you reply to me on - it is one of those weird questions you ask yourself quietly and think deeply through the night about. But, I also ask this = don't reply to me, just to yourself. You need to ask yourself, not me. You need to reply to yourself, not me.

(plus I could get really annoyed and such...but this IS one question I'd prefer you quietly ask yourself and think about without answering me ever. It isn't the loud or public decision, it is a private one where you explore more of your inner self - seriously, so don't reply to me).

Thanks

See you in the UN

Good points...if people want it done to themselves, we have little argument (hey, I was kind of supporting democracy, so we can't go dictating "you can do this, etc etc").

Please discuss this issue on the main thread only- http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=150189


I second this request. Now stop posting, before I ask a moderator to lock this thread. :twisted:

Let me start by saying that do not feel FGM is a practice that should be continued. It is quite devastating to the person receiving the treatment. Let me continue by asking what you may mean by saying someone willingly undergoes this treatment? I've never heard of ANYONE willing to have this done. Not saying that I've talked to or interviewed thousands of women or anything on the subject, but nonetheless.
Let me now say something different. Let me play devil's advocate for a moment. As a member of a democratic nation, one which does not believe that any people has the right to oppress any other people, let me say that there is literally nothing that can be done to stop this practice in good conscience. To alliterate this more, suppose for a moment I am the ruler of country X, and I decide that FGM, which your country, country Y, practices regularly, is against my moral beliefs. Let us continue to say that even the women in your own country do not agree with it, and this practice is being forced upon them.
Here, then, is where we come to a dilemma. Do I, as the leader of country X, have the right to move in to country Y and change anything about the way you live? Any more so than you have the right to move into my country and change the way I live? I most certainly do not. The line must be drawn at forcing another country to live under your laws, be they ethical, moral, religious, or societo-cultural.
On the other hand, what CAN we do to stop this practice, in good conscience? The only viable alternative I see is education of the people. If the people, and I do mean ALL the people, of every race, religion, background, social class, or age were given the truth about this abhorrent practice, then it would be more likely (though still not guaranteed) to fade away.
The only other option would, literally, be going into country Y with armed forces, and coercing our viewpoint either through military pressure or direct conflict. In the short-term, this would end many good and innocent lives on both sides. Many of those lives will even be the very victims we are trying to save. Now, many of you may say that in the long run, however, we would end this abhorrent practice. You may even be right in saying so, and thinking long-term, one may see this as a viable option.
Now let me face you with another somewhat broad example from our own history. Under the inexorable tide of "Christianization" that occured in the 1500s and 1600s, wave after wave of Christian colonist and "missionary" brought what they saw as the "Word of God" or more accurately, their own individual viewpoints to the indigenous peoples who lived on the lands they were trying to claim. The Christian missionaries, absolutely sure of the rightness of their actions, forced the indigenous populations to do as they were told by the oppressors. The Christians destroyed cultures, burned religious relics, and generally made a mess of everything they touched. Not just thousands, but literally millions of lives in North America were lost by their actions. (see smallpox blankets for details)
How is this any different from our own story? If we force anyone into our viewpoint, no matter how right we think we are, we are no better than the Christian "missionaries" who raped and pillaged the whole of North America, Africa, and parts of Asia during the last four hundred years. It would be abominable behavior on our part.
So, while we then view this action, FGM as abhorrent, let us take the moral high ground. Let us not force our own viewpoints, no matter how good our intentions, upon our neighbors. Rather, let us strive always to make the truth known to them. Let us show them by example, deed, and word the truth, and let them decide. Patience, I think, is herein a virtue.
My vote is for the complete abolition of FGM, and it (as well as related practices) is completely forbidden anywhere within freedom- and truth-loving Chimaeron. However, the Chimaeronians will not force their opinion upon anyone else. We shall simply stand tall as a bastion of truth, and allow all those around us to see in the light of day. With truth will come freedom, for without freedom there is no truth, and without truth there is no freedom.

-K
From a speech given by representative of
Democratic Republic of Chimaeron,
East Camus
United Nations

The main difference between missionaries traveling the world causing a ruckus and the current debate is that the native peoples of America, Afirca, and Asia were not able to simply 'walk away' from the situation. The various UN nations have the right to walk away from the UN and maintain their cultural practices as they see fit. In fact, by joining the UN, they consent to abide by all UN resolutions for good or ill. Its their choice to participate, and if they don't like what participation means, they have the right to stop participating and go their merry way. They also have the option if the resolution does pass, to propose their own resolution that will allow FGM for explicit cultural purposes or a total repeal.

For those who keep missing it.

Please discuss this issue on the main thread only- http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=150189


I second this request. Now stop posting, before I ask a moderator to lock this thread. :twisted:

Agreed.

Might I add :

Disclaimer: This thread is not meant to insult any nations, or any moderators, including but not limited to Tactical Grace.

Maybe in the future maybe try making your "disclaimer" readable so people don't just automatically think your trying to ---- - stir with a thread.

- 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/target=display_nation/nation=komokom)
<- Not A Moderator, Just A Know It All.
" Clowns To The Left of Me ... Jokers To The Right, Here I am ... "