NationStates Jolt Archive

Draft 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Wherefore seeing that there is yet to be a resolution protecting the Human Genome, the very thing that makes you you, and me me, us us, and everything we see everything that it is, Keana hereby proposes such a resolution to be put in place.
This resolution would prohibit in all abiding nations of the UN the use of genetics to enhance or manipulate the Human Genome in crude, barberic manners, and the use of said actions for unapprovable reasons or gains.
This resolution is not brought forth because of what is best for one side or another, but because this resolution would be for the ultimate good of mankind. If we stand here today and avoid this issue, or allow such practices to occur, the results could become volatile and dangerous. Also those results could violate the very rights of humans to be humans. To be unique, to have everything that they have because they were born with it. Not for them to have everything they have because they sold their bodies and are now beyond that of what a human was meant to be. Not for them to be some weapon to be used in a war or to be used to be a method of terrorizing innocent people around the world.
Will we now play God? Will we now play nature? Will those who believe in higher powers attempt to take the place of that higher power? Will those who believe in evolution try to dip their hands in nature's work of millions of years? No my friends no matter how you as a human being BELIEVE you came here, all ought to see that we have no right to such dangerous actions.
With the mapping of the human genome comes both a great privilege, a great oppertunity, a great responsibility, and a grave obligation. We can take this and better mankind by coming up with preventions and curing of awful diseases which we now have yet to cure. We can take this and try to further understand the great machine that is the human being. We can take this and try to help those who otherwise are doomed to sad circumstances beyond their control.
Or we can use this technology to create abominable weapons of war. This not only includes the theoretical "super-soldier" but the manipulation of animals to make them biological weapons to unleash on another nation as said. But the biggest reason why I bring this before you today is to prevent the genetic manipulation of certain diseases and viruses which would cause them to become even more deadly and contageous. This resolution would not only be a prevention for human genetic manipulation, but genetic manipulation of any organism that could and would be for wrong reasons (I.E. War, Terrorism, etc.)

This resolution however will provide clause for genetic exploration and genetic improvements when it comes to the field of medicine. This would include further exploration of human and other organism genomes. However that purpose would be restricted to such research as cures, and prevention of diseases such as HIV/AIDS, Cancer, and others.

The hybridization of human and animal which would result in the creation of a "Man-Beast" would also be prohibited. However there will be clause for the use of animal genes if cures for certain ailments could be found in them. This means the transfer of an immunity gene or genetic information of that nature and not the actual and full hybridization of humans and animals.
This resolution, the Genetic Protection Act (henceforth the GPA) will protect not only today's nations from abominable weapons of war, but the future nations to come. May we now not faulter when we are needed most.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

please give me your advice and thoughts on this possible future resolution.

The Prime Minister is pleased to offer the support of His Majesty the King's Government for the Draft Resolution. The King's Government will be honoured to assist our distinguished colleagues from Keana in any way possible to ensure this Resolution reaches the General Assembly for vote.

The people of Sophista gladly reject this attempt to legislate morality into the scientific instutions of the world, in the same way we condemn any efforts to copy the illustrious signature afford to our ambassador.

1. The build up of "clone armies"
The United Nations has no right to interfere with a nation's right to defend itself unless considerable evidence can be shown that the methods implied are inherently dangerous to the world. A country having a clone army is no more dangerous than a country having an army of similar size made entirely of non-clones, and you have given no convincing argument why these clones are dangerous enough to merit this kind of legisation.

2. The replacing of national leaders with clones who are under control of outside forces
This practice is reprehensible because it involves the manipulation of a foreign government by an outside source, which is an act of war. The clone part has nothing to do with it, aside from being a highly-unlikely sci-fi wet dream. If someone chooses to sink to such barbarism, they do so at risk of invoking the wrath of allied nations. It is none of our concern.

3. For the sake of Human Right of uniqueness
Should we then outlaw the practice of birthing twins? The idea that each and every human is unique has more to do with the zygote not splitting than some greater than ourselves looking down and guiding every cell. Cloning without the consent of the individual is disagreeable, but to say that a person should be prevented from having a copy of his or herself when they have chosen so is a violation of their right to do what they choose with their own body, so long as no one else gets hurt.

4. For the avoidance of controversies, both of human rights and religeon
5. For the sake of Moral decency
The human genome is not some sacred piece of divine inspiration, it's a cellular chemistry book. To say that we should avoid it because it's sacred is like saying we shouldn't climb mountains because we're getting too close to God. Even if you disagree, the UN has no place legislating morality to nations who do not share that belief. Unless it's causing harm to my neighbors or the global community, my government the right to do it pleases within its borders, including engineering the human genome.

The purpose for the outlawing of Human Cloning is seen as necessary for the following reason:

1. The build up of "clone armies"
2. The replacing of national leaders with clones who are under control of outside forces
3. For the sake of Human Right of uniqueness
4. For the avoidance of controversies, both of human rights and religeon
5. For the sake of Moral decency



*Robert Anderson rises*

I only wish to ask you to fortify some questionable reasons you list. I will hold passing judgement on this until the final proposal is drawn up. I'll ask my questions in the order of the issue you listed. In order to help you draw up a better proposal, I will take a defensive position in my questioning.

First off, is a clone army more dangerous than a regular army? Is a tactical warhead, not just as capable of destroying a clone as it is a naturally born human being? Do we not need to focus our attentions on imposing sanctions on the size of standing armies instead of dancing around the issues that impose the heavier threat on this world?

I'm not a scientist, and trust me when I say, there are a lot more people in Traxtonia that can give us some serious realities on cloning capabilities than I can, but is there not a way to tell the difference between a clone and the naturally born human whose DNA it is cloned after?

Are you suggesting the possibility of a clone being somehow transplanted through all the security personel and protocols that nations have in place, and taking over a nation completely undetected?

Going a step further and a little outside of the box, do we not already have national leaders under the control of outside forces such as special interest groups, that already mis-represent their nations best interests?

Is being unique a human right? Just because they are the same as something else, what would they be violating? Are quintuplets now free to sue their parents over violating their rights?

It is human nature to have controversy. Some nations thrive on it. Cloning is not a one sided issue. There is already controversy over whether to allow it or not, what guidelines should govern it, etc... You're only side-stepping a certain group of supporters or opposers.

How is it morally indecent to make clones? Is the U.N. going to govern religion as well?

I hope these questions will help you solidify your position.

OOC: Looks like the people of Sophista hit the submit reply button before we finished typing.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wherefore seeing that the mapping of the Human Genome is now a reality, and seeing that that reality may be manipulated for certain unapprovable reasons,Ah, yes, and if we completely ignore the concept of differing perception we might even agree ...This resolution will outlaw manipulation of the Human Genome in the following areas:Oh yeah, and I think I can guess where this is going ...*Genetic engineering for the creation of weapons (I.E. Supersoldiers)Why ? Did nation X's forces cheat and use better soldiers against nation Y's forces again, eh ? ... But realy, if there is one thing b-grade modern science fiction movies educate us about its ... ummm ... genetics + lab-coats = bad ? ... A true triumph of intelligence, that ... *Genetic manipulation causing the hybridization of the human species and that of animals of any sort resulting in "Man-Beasts"So, like we can kiss good-bye the size-able furry-furvert vote right there, in fact I bet a fair percentage of non-human-nation players are stepping over your muddy puddle of a resolution into the warmth of the proposal que ...*Human CloningListen I know Star Wars Episode 2 was shocking-bad, but really, don't take it out on the clones, I doubt that they wanted to be part to that travesty of a movie as well.The purpose for the outlawing of Human Cloning is seen as necessary for the following reason:I * bet * I see the word morality here, I bet I do, that or its bastard child moral decency hanging around ...1. The build up of "clone armies"George Lucas, you bastard, look what you've done.2. The replacing of national leaders with clones who are under control of outside forcesOh, so you've played Perfect Dark on the old Nintendo 64 as well have you, well, okay, I * think * it might be time to just " let go " okay ?
3. For the sake of Human Right of uniquenessHow the hell does being a clone stop you from being unique ? Well, I'm probably ripping open the philosophy here, but this could almost be interesting.4. For the avoidance of controversies, both of human rights and religeonYes, cause nothing solves a problem like sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting " Nyah, Nyah, Nyah, I CAN'T HERE YOU ! " and repeat x infinity.5. For the sake of Moral decency.Bingo ! :D But, that aside your morals and your complete lack of backing them up in that exact clause are going to cost you votes, you can't blanket win an debate by shouting " morals ! " and not expect every other team to look at you as if you just indulged in swallowing your prompt cards whole.All nations will still be free to explore the human genome for the purposes of medical help (disease prevention and curing, etc.) and for the universal betterment of mankind.Yeah, right, what-ever, so your limiting any and all genetic research down a single alley to medical research only, yes, and along the way, proclaiming any other use to be abomination. Uh-huh. Well gee, I bet you'll just wet yourself when you learn about how many vaccines are developed in chicken eggs. " OMG, ANIMAL STUFF ! EWWW ! " I suppose ...This excludes crude practices such as the afore mentioned and compulsory human testing.Of course, since you never mentioned complusor human testing most of us are scrolling back up the page to waste another 2 minutes of our lives in the fruitless search from some bloody coherant thought as opposed to the so far revealled " Human genetics + anything else = OMG NOES IS WRONG ! " ...Thereby does the afore mentioned reasonsHa, reason, something I failed to find here ...and proposal receive the endorsement and plea for passage by the nations of the world by the Democratic Republic of Keana.1) No. 2) You don't need to keep shafting your name in it you know, it will actually appear up top all the way, even on the record-books if we're to be so unlucky for it to become law.please give me your advice and thoughts on this possible future resolution.Possibility, well, at least your a great optomist.

With all due respect to the previous two speakers, the Prime Minister would humbly point out that human cloning could very well have the effect of causing the human, as an individual, to lose the very qualities that define 'humanity.'

Would humanity have any meaning if we were a world of clones? The beauty of humanity is the uniqueness of each individual. A clone is not unique. It's a reproduction of something else. We would suggest that natural reproduction is too great a risk to run, so we keep copying 'what works.' The magic of life would thus lose its lustre. In essence, we would be playing God.

The Prime Minister grants that cloning, such as used in stem-cells for the potential recreation of nerves, organs, and muscle tissue, does potentially hold great benefits to World Society and great dividends for whichever Nation is first to unlock these mysteries. However, cloning must be restricted to this use. His Majesty the King's Government can find no similar societal benefit for the cloning of a human being, and restates its enthusiastic support for the Draft Resolution.

1. The build up of "clone armies"

It would be cheaper and easier just to force your populace to reproduce lots, and conscript all their kids into the army. Do you have any idea how rare it is for a clone zygote to successfully develop, or how riddled with disability the survivors making up this army would be? (New Scientist vol 170 issue 2291 - 19 May 2001, page 14 on cow cloning - "While artificial insemination has a 40 per cent success rate, at best only 5 to 10 per cent of implanted cloned embryos become live calves. Around 75 per cent die in the first two months of pregnancy but miscarriages and terminations happen right to the end. And every fourth clone born is either stillborn or suffers from a lethal defect.") And that each clone has to be placed in a surrogate mother to develop, so the rate of reproduction (even if the success rate could be brought up to be comparable to survival rates of natural zygotes) would be no better than with normal reproduction?

And once cloning methods improve to iron out these problems, there is still no more reason to ban armies of clones than to ban armies of non-clones.

2. The replacing of national leaders with clones who are under control of outside forces

If you cloned a President who was 38, say, the clone would always be 38 years younger than that President, and wouldn't even look the same (remember nature vs. nurture? genetics isn't the only thing which influences an individual's features).

3. For the sake of Human Right of uniqueness

As others have said, how is this a right? And if it is, what about identical twins etc?

Actually, clones are unique. Despite being genetically identical to another organism, they are influenced by different environmental factors, and would have a separate consciousness.

4. For the avoidance of controversies, both of human rights and religeon

Religion should never dictate legislation, and the only problem with human rights I can see is that until cloning techniques improve, the risk of agonising death or diability is cruel to the clone (this doesn't justify a permananent ban, merely a temporary hold).

5. For the sake of Moral decency

Whose morals dictate this?

IMO, if the owner of the DNA gives permission, and cloning procedures for our closest relatives in the animal kingdom can be shown to have an acceptably low risk of problems which would disadvantage the clone, then there is no legitimate reason why cloning should not be legal.

*Genetic manipulation causing the hybridization of the human species and that of animals of any sort resulting in "Man-Beasts"

If, say, a gene was found in mosquitos that gave them immunity to HIV/AIDS, this legislation would ban the insertion of that gene into the genome of a human. I see no reason why such a practice should be banned.

I see no need to restate what several other nations have already said. I will simply say.

We do not support this, and if it came up for a vote would do all we could to convince other nations to do the same.

I know what you are trying to do, but you are being too sweeping. Try reducing it to one field.

Try to ban 1 of them, and list out a good set of reasons for just the 1.
(Not that we would agree with any of your points)

um... weve already allowed human cloning for medical research purposes so we are against this. (plus we get a boost in population, so we are very against this proposal)

Arguements taken into account. 2nd draft released.

our government is preparing to start a genetic program that will make cross breeds, Were Wolfs (not the insane blood lusting kind that goes crazy from full moon exposure) and others of that particuler genre, we are cloning humans to find ways that allow us to make such cross breeds happen without negative side effects on the first try. we dont not have any current intrests in using it for military purposes

Draganovian Scretary of Medical Research and Discovery
and, Draganovian Department Of Defense

Draft 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Wherefore seeing that there is yet to be a resolution protecting the Human Genome,...

Silly.

Extremely silly basically, but not specifically, because if it WERE possible to do these things, there is no force that would prevent a covert power from doing so.

An alternate, and more plausible, method to combat genetic manipulation would be to outlaw all use of genetic material, especially semen (male "output"), for any use other than pilous reinforcement (hair mousse).

Yes,.. that means outlawing sexual reproduction.

No people,... no problem.

May we now hear from someone other than the "let's outlaw badness" contingent..?


-Keiki'olu I'ake'oke'o
Current "Big-Diggah" and "Chief Head-Whompah"

"May prosperity and freedom from silly rules be your destiny..!"

This new draft is vague, tangled and full of rhetoric. At least the first version was set out clearly and straightforwardly. Proposals should not be written like speeches - read Sophista's excellent guide at http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=342360 then put this into a sensible format, and then we can start to look at the changed content itself.

Actually, the confusion I found when reading the new draft may be me and the fact that I should have been in bed at least couple of hours ago. If others have no trouble making head or tail of your new draft, then I offer my apologies and ask that you ignore this post. I'll go to bed now.

This new draft is vague, tangled and full of rhetoric. At least the first version was set out clearly and straightforwardly. Proposals should not be written like speeches - read Sophista's excellent guide at http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=342360 then put this into a sensible format, and then we can start to look at the changed content itself.

Actually, the confusion I found when reading the new draft may be me and the fact that I should have been in bed at least couple of hours ago. If others have no trouble making head or tail of your new draft, then I offer my apologies and ask that you ignore this post. I'll go to bed now.


The Kindgom of Traxtonia wishes to extend thanks to the nation of Myopia for guiding this process. We feel that the new draft is lacking in cohesion and clarity.

Thinly veiled Bio-Chauvinism is one of the reasons we chose to reject UN authority. What do you think will happen to bioroids once their creation becomes illegal? They are sentient beings, just like you are. Even if you do your best to secure human rights for them, "genetic protection" legislation will make life very difficult for a modified or artificial humanoid. They will need contraband technology for life extension therapy and other basic treatments. What you are proposing is irresponsible and dangerous.

Be prepared for a bombardment of protest from the Pan-Sapient Rights Front.

First of all, I would like to agree with Myopia on this. There is too much rhetoric.

And I would like to say this concerning the use of genetically engineered germs. Please read the U.N. resolution entitled "Elimination of Bio Weapons" implemented Saturday, May 31, 2003. There is nothing to worry about when it comes to these things.

Also, read the U.N. resolution entited "BioRights Declaration" implemented Thursday, May 6, 2004. Your proposal would basically take away the "right" of a genetically modified or cloned person to join the military. Your proposal is already illegal if I understand it correctly.

Perhaps the alternative would be to ban conscription and drafting of people to join the military.

But hey! Tihland doesn't even have a military, lol! There is still work that needs to be done.

Ok, read it again after the benefit of a night's sleep, and it's still vague tangled and full of rhetoric. Follow my suggestions in my previous post to look at Sophista's resolution writing guide and write this again in a clear, official format, then we can take a proper look at the content.

Look familiar any-body ?

BioRights Declaration

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: The free carolinas

Description: The United Nations and its member states shall hereby recognize and henceforth regard the inherent rights of cloned and genetically engineered persons as being the equal of those of naturally born and unmodified persons.

Komokom, do you not read anything I put up at all? This explains so much...

alsio we are looking towards ways to make cloned humans look diffrent from the person they were cloned. also big population boom!! over 2 million people a day instead of 1 million!!

I would have thought it would be easy to make cloned people "look" different. After all, no two identical twins are exactly alike, and identicial twins are simply mutual clones of each other. You are more than the sum of your genetic parts ... external conditions can drastically change your appearance. I recently glanced over a headline that implied that being fat may be the result of a virus. :eek:

I am morally opposed to cloning, for reasons that aren't important at this time. I am also hesitant about genetic engineering. I even have some problems with artificial insemination as it generally exists today. However, I clearly think that a person is a person no matter how made.

Komokom, do you not read anything I put up at all ?Yes, actually, I do, and in this case as well , I did, I came, I saw, I read. I post. But, I thought it might be an idea to make the proposal we were both thinking of quite clear. That, and my way stood out more, so more people would ( hopefuly ) read it.This explains so much ...No point.