NationStates Jolt Archive

Vote for UN Bill of Rights by typing it in in the UN resolution search engine. This is a MAJOR thing for the UN because this Bill of Rights you can add, modify, and delete amendments from. Just at least read this resolution.

I would think that the UN Bill of Rights, since it takes its name from the American document of the same name, might be incorporating real world legislature... :headbang:

I would think that the UN Bill of Rights, since it takes its name from the American document of the same name, might be incorporating real world legislature... :headbang:

It also violates game mechanics. Look at what is IIRC article 13. It claims amendments / repeals are allowed on a 3/4 vote.

While I actually agree with a 3/4 level for that sort of thing, it *is* a hard fast rule and good rule for now.

Firstly, doesnt the NS UN currently have both a universal bill of rights which seeks to protect the rights of the individuals?

Secondly, doesnt the NS UN currently have a separate governing document, which lays out NS UN member nation rights and expectations?

While I have not seen this document directly (as I abhor reading through pages of proposals, none of which I can endorse), I wonder what specifics you plan to offer in your own version that would: 1.) expand or give rights beyond that of previously passed legislation; and 2.) be fully implementable in the NS UN without breaking game mechanics.

I do, however, agree that current resolutions should not be passed without having a majority vote (being say, 2/3 of the voting nations) and a veto/appeal ability. Neither of these exist at this time and one is not allowed.

I have been looking for some type of bill of rights on Nationstates but cant find any. That is why I am proposing this resolution...

Having written a proposition, entitled the Universal Ethics Act, I am quite certain that both mentioned documents do currently exist and reside for reading in the "UN Proposals Throughout History" link.

Please study these resolutions more carefully.

'Universal Bill of Rights'
'Rights and Duties of UN States'

Do I need to put them here?

* Runs around in a circle, laughing manically, because to his knowing, no one has even yet pointed out what poor form it is not to paste up a copy of your proposal here.

Some people love to complain. Some people love to see people complain. Others, the real leaders of this world, simply carry the flags that have been droped in vain. And so without any more commentary, here is the resolution that is the subject of the poll.

With this Bill of Rights will come amendments which may be added, modified, or removed in the future.

Amendments
1) Freedom of Speech among all human beings

2) Freedom of Privacy within their own home and/or property, which may only be uninherited by law of UN.

3) Right to a trial by jury with all civil and adult cases.

4) Right to a speedy trial for immediate council and conclusion to all civil, juvenial, and adult cases.

5) Right to Peroll for all juvenial and adult cases that are not severe.

6) Freedom of Press among all nations with an exception of government laws prohibiting press entering government facilities.

7) Freedom of Religion among all individuals in all nations within the UN.

8) Freedom of Travel between all nations within the UN except for times of high alert or war or other UN laws.

9) Free Welfare for all individuals who are below the set amount of income for an average household.

10) Free Medication and Doctor Apointments for all individuals who cannot afford Medication for their ownself or household.

11) Free Education for all individuals and/or households that cannot afford basic education(grades K-12) that are within the UN.

12) Free (911) service for all nations, individuals, and/or households that do not have basic communication including telephone service or any other easy means of communication.

13) Stating that any laws may be added by UN members, modified by UN members, or removed by UN members following a careful system. There must be at least 3/4 vote of all UN members to add, modify, or remove an amendment.

14) Right of Decreased taxes for all individuals and/or households that do not have the minimum household income rate.

I'll comment on the law in another post.

1) Nice but vague. Why is it limited to "among human beings?"

2) Exceptionally vague.

3) Good.

4) Very Good.

5) What's a peroll?

6) Somewhat broad, and vague.

7) Good.

8) Nice, but I wouldn't call it a right.

9) "Free Welfare" is not a right. It's nice, but it's not a right.

10) "Free Medication" is not a right. It's nice, but it's not a right.

11) "Free Education" is not a right. It's nice, but it's not a right.

12) "911 service" is not a right. It's nice, but it's not a right.

13) This is a rules change and thus forbidden by Nationstate rules and regulations.

14) "Decreased taxes" is not a right. It's nice, but it's not a right.

As written I cannot support this resolution.

Some people love to complain. Some people love to see people complain. Others, the real leaders of this world, simply carry the flags that have been droped in vain. And so without any more commentary, here is the resolution that is the subject of the poll.



I'll comment on the law in another post.

Actually the reason you'll see complaints here is most of this has been done before (and one clause is an outright game mechanics violation). The point being, I'm guessing the author did *NOT* bother to look at prior UN resolutions.

That would be like walking into a second year calculus class and starting to solve simple geometry problems ... but while the rest of the class and teacher give you the, "Where the heck have you been while the rest of us were not only finished with geometry, but now studying algebra?" look.

How many times this year will we:

- Save the Forests
- Establish a Free Press
- Establish Freedom of Regilion
- Legalize Prostitution

These are all wonderful ideas, but it certainly is a slap in the face to those prior resolutions to suggest they weren't good enough to even *mention*.

It would be OK IMHO to talk about forests again, if we started talking about "how" to save the forests. Despite rumours to the contray, we aren't "God". We simply can't say,

"Let there be light" and have light appear.
"Let all the forests be safe" and have racoons and birds flourish again.
"The Press Shalt Be Free" and expect that never again will censorship trouble us.
"Be Fruitful and Multiple, but Pay For It" and then prostitutes will be treated with the unmost respect and considered no different than teachers, lawyers, and doctors.

I know it is terribly unfair to come into the middle of the game when all the "easy" statements have been made. But at some point saying the same thing over and over again really does get pointless. And *that* is what the complaints are really about.

5) What's a peroll?


I believe that it's a misspelled version of parole.

5. The word is parole.

And I would disagree that parole is a right. Firstly, individuals who have broken the law should not be guaranteed the right to such luxuries. If, within your governing borders, YOU want to set all "lesser offenses" criminals go, then so be it. But studies have proven time and time again that the lack of proper punishment/rehabilitation of "lesser offenses" criminals have lead to the escalation of their crimes. Shortly put, criminals must receive appropriate punishment for their crimes or you will spend a lifetime sheltering them within the penal system.

It is the sovereign right of nations to choose what they deem as appropriate punishment, and not that of the UN, baring severe exclusions already covered by other resolutions (torture is one that comes to mind).

I also see issues with 2, 3, and 4.

2. Agreed that this is extremely vague and should not be the right of the UN to determine when or where a country can uninherit the right of privacy of its citizens. Please remember: the NS UN IS NOT a central government, nor is it intended to be such. International law should only relate to issues that are a: vitally important to all the members of a global society; and/or b: found to be in certain need due to extensive abuse, mishandling, or lacking of legislation in a multitude of member nations (logging industry requirements comes to mind).

Here is a copy of the Universal Bill of Rights...

The Universal Bill of Rights
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights Strength: Strong Proposed by: Free porcupines
Description: Recalling the many egregious infringements of human rights, Recognizing the need to protect basic human rights, Deploring any acts by government at the sake of human rights, Determined to put an end to the violation of human rights, The United Nations shall endorse what will be called the Universal Bill of Rights, the articles of which are as follows:
Article 1 -- All human beings have the right to choose worship any faith, and to change their religious beliefs at any time without punishment on the part of the state.
Article 2 -- All human beings have the right to express themselves through speech and through the media without any interference.
Article 3 -- All human beings have the right to peacefully assemble.
Article 4 -- All human beings have the right to be treated equally under the law of any member nation.
Article 5 -- All human beings must not be subjected to torture or to cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment.
Article 6 -- No human beings will be subjected to arrest or exile without an explicit list of their offenses.
Article 7 -- Any arrested person must be assumed innocent until proven guilty.
Article 8 -- A human beings family members cannot be held accountable for the crimes of their relative.
Article 9 -- Any persons who violate any of these articles shall be held accountable by the law.
Article 10 -- The Universal Bill of Rights does not override the existing Bill of Rights of United Nations members. If any of these stated rights do not exist in a member nation, they are herby protected. If any nation has rights that go beyond these universal rights, the Universal Bill of Rights will not remove those rights.

Votes For: 11169

Votes Against: 3649

Implemented: Fri Aug 8 2003

Due Process
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.


Category: The Furtherment of Democracy Strength: Strong Proposed by: The Global Market
Description: No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limbo, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Votes For: 9027

Votes Against: 4677

Implemented: Wed Aug 13 2003

The list of resolutions ALREADY passed addressing most of the issues within your proposal goes on and on.

Free Education
Implemented: Tue Aug 19 2003
Fair Trial
Implemented: Sun Jul 13 2003
Definition of 'Fair Trial'
Implemented: Sat Feb 14 2004

Seeing as how these previously passed resolutions exist, it comes to mind that you have not studied these resolutions, although you claim to have looked for them.

'Freedom of the Press' and 'Universal Freedom of Choice' to add to the list.
These aren't hidden behind mysterious names.

Tzorsland, And some of the others appear to blow their own trumpet cause they like the noise. ;)

I wonder if in the email sent to people when they join the U.N. could be altered to suggest that new members " read the list of past resolutions before they even flucking think about sending anything in ... " or something a little more diplomatic ... :D

First of all, I am not blowing my own trumpet. I can't even play a trumpet. :(

Second of all, I was commenting on Komokom's comment of "Runs around in a circle, laughing manically, because to his knowing, no one has even yet pointed out what poor form it is not to paste up a copy of your proposal here." I wasn't commenting on the question of due dilligence. Many never bother to read the sticky on making resolutions. Many never bother to check the history of UN resolutions in the first place. The number of resolutions where the action clause says the exact opposite of what the title says is mind boggling.

In the midst of all this insanity, complaining about or even commenting about not posting the resolution on the board when you can easily open a second browser window and paste the resolution for the person is ... well it's just spam and flotsam on the sea of public discourse.

Tzorsland, many of us do post other people's proposals here because the writers have failed to do so. Look around a bit.

I personally arrived late to this discussion, and mistakenly believed that it was discussion of a future proposal rather than a current proposal. As such, I did not search the proposal list for it.

Tzorsland, I was trying to make a point relating to my interpretation of something being said, half as a joke, half in sarcasm, it seems it fell flat though.

Secondly the point of my post was that I nor any-body else but the writer should have to post up a copy, there is no invisible barrier making it impossible, in fact, if they can inform us to use a search function and where and how to do so, as they often do, I suspect they are more then capable of using such complex actions ... copy .. and paste ... to the effect we can get down to business, for their benefit.

But then again, these are some-times the same people who want us to make George Bush the Secretary General of the United Nations ... sigh ... But I'll leave off before we start hearing violins playing ...

And no, I can't play the violin OR trumpet. But that is beside the point, ;)

Goodness gracious.

Since we seem to have thoroughly decimated the need for this proposal, why are you continuing to bump the thread? You giving more opportunity for someone else to come along and start commenting on how much they like it and will vote in favor of it.

On top of that, your tiff has nothing to do with the proposal itself, and seems over a fairly innocuous subject that would warrant no response.