NationStates Jolt Archive

Category: The Furtherment of Democracy

Description: A nation has the ability to govern and control its people however it sees fit barring a set of minimal standards set in the single catch-all articles. This resolution further prevents large encroachments into a nation's ability of self-governance.

Article I - No nation may commit mass assault against a political faction, ethnicity, or gender unless that group has committed a direct breach of national law.

Article II - No nation may enforce laws that are in direct opposition with and political faction, ethnicity, or gender within two weeks of that law's enactment.


Edited for brain-fart.
You know, I read the sticky, I just completely dumbed out when I wrote this.

{ahem}

There is no category of "National Rights". You might want to look over the Before you make a proposal (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=282176) sticky and try again.

Also, you title is way too long. :)

Luck.

The title's too long, but hey, there's no short way to say, "Removing some of the UN's power over member nations so we don't piss off members who don't want their governing freedoms removed but want to aid in the advancement of global politics." As for the category, yeah, I edited that.

Can you explain to me exactly what resolution this repeals?

As the name suggests, it is a gross repeal of all resolutions that encroach into a nations ability to govern it's own civil rights barring these standards. Passing mindless "touchy-feely warm and fuzzy" laws to standardize things like women's rights and various other things not only alienate non UN members from joining, but also removes the individual freedoms of nations to run themselves how they see fit.

The idea of some "father knows best" governing body over the entire UN is ridiculous, there's no need for any country to feel like some religious nutjob country on the other side of the planet is governing how they operate. This kind of repeal will allow the UN not only to be more inviting to newer nations with leadership that yearns for true self-government, but still prevents outright brutalization of anyone.

All in all, this is a repeal/resolution about the freedom that the UN so strongly claims to want to spread, unless of course the UN only spreads the freedom that it alone agrees with.

All in all, this is a repeal/resolution about the freedom that the UN so strongly claims to want to spread, unless of course the UN only spreads the freedom that it alone agrees with.

Actually, most U.N. members want just that.

As the name suggests, it is a gross repeal of all resolutions that encroach into a nations ability to govern it's own civil rights barring these standards. Passing mindless "touchy-feely warm and fuzzy" laws to standardize things like women's rights and various other things not only alienate non UN members from joining, but also removes the individual freedoms of nations to run themselves how they see fit.

The idea of some "father knows best" governing body over the entire UN is ridiculous, there's no need for any country to feel like some religious nutjob country on the other side of the planet is governing how they operate. This kind of repeal will allow the UN not only to be more inviting to newer nations with leadership that yearns for true self-government, but still prevents outright brutalization of anyone.

All in all, this is a repeal/resolution about the freedom that the UN so strongly claims to want to spread, unless of course the UN only spreads the freedom that it alone agrees with.


The UN is not a single body. It is made up of 36,000 seperate bodies (if you will excuse the phrase). So why people think there is one mind controlling the UN is beyond me.

The UN is democractic. Those proposals that get more votes for them than against them are enacted. Those that don't, aren't.

This repeal will not do anything of what you are claiming. It will however plunge most nations back in to the dark age. Assuming that is it is legal under game rules - something of which I am far from convinced.

As the name suggests, it is a gross repeal of all resolutions that encroach into a nations ability to govern it's own civil rights barring these standards.

Could you list which resolutions you believe would fit into this category?

Could you list which resolutions you believe would fit into this category?

That outlaw pedophillia is an obvious target. How can you govern effectively if you keep having to lock up people who want to have sex with kids!! What were they thinking!!!

(/sarcasm)

That outlaw pedophillia is an obvious target. How can you govern effectively if you keep having to lock up people who want to have sex with kids!! What were they thinking!!!

(/sarcasm)

Indeed. That sort of thing takes time away from dalliances with the secretary, and we can't have that...

Civil rights laws on the whole. They are an unwelcome, unnecessary, and hostile encroachment to the rights of a nation that wishes to aid in the guiding the politics of the world. Globalized civil rights are, as part of their own design, immoral. Imposing the morals of the small majourity onto an only slightly smaller minourity is wrong, and should not be allowed.

Civil rights laws on the whole. They are an unwelcome, unnecessary, and hostile encroachment to the rights of a nation that wishes to aid in the guiding the politics of the world. Globalized civil rights are, as part of their own design, immoral. Imposing the morals of the small majourity onto an only slightly smaller minourity is wrong, and should not be allowed.

Civil rights are immoral? The right for a person to be treated as such, and live a life free from persecution, torture, state sanctioned hate and pain are immoral? The right not to be a slave is immoral? The right to not be exploited for the benifit of big corporations is immoral? The right to prevent people from making their two year old daughter have sex with them is immoral?

You really believe there are not some civil rights that apply across the whole of the world? That there is not one single thing that the whole of the UN can agree on as being the right thing to do?

You really belive that?