NationStates Jolt Archive

Dear Friends,

The Armed Republic of Aliste is fearful that this new resolution may be overempowering scientists and putting our citizens at risk.

I have thusly requested to repeal the resolution and I ask for your full support.

Below is the argument I have made in my proposal to repeal the resolution. Thank you.

----------------------------------------------------------------

This resolution is poor. It disarms the state in setting down certain necessary restrictions, regulations, etc.

Without certain restrictions in place, science will be free to do as they please - this includes human cloning.

These days your DNA could be extracted from saliva, hair, finger or toe nails, just about anything really. It being that easy - the people of your nation are now at risk of becoming science experiments - thanks to this resolution.

"By ensuring that peaceful and responsible scientists can research by their own accord, and in any nation they please, technology will move forward, and trade will increase."

To me, that spells disaster, "research by their own accord."

There needs to be, for the love of humanity, certain restrictions in place so that these scientists do not become over empowered and step out of line.

I ask that this resolution be repealed. Thank you.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

Scientists and Supporters,

Please DO NOT listen to this foolishness. Science must make progress or we will be stuck in an age of stagnation. Do not allow this person to fool you, without advancements in Science we will be stuck in the stone age. This proposal is pure nonsense. Please, I urge you, do not let this proposal pass!

Dear Friends,

The Armed Republic of Aliste is fearful that this new resolution may be overempowering scientists and putting our citizens at risk.

Compared to what? Military states that shoot people just for the fun of it?

Actually, that's a pretty good analogy to science run amok...

I have thusly requested to repeal the resolution and I ask for your full support.

Below is the argument I have made in my proposal to repeal the resolution. Thank you.

Should be fun.

This resolution is poor. It disarms the state in setting down certain necessary restrictions, regulations, etc.

Without certain restrictions in place, science will be free to do as they please - this includes human cloning.

And what is wrong with cloning? If they are just cloning individual body parts, the issue of a soul is moot because they are not cloning a full being. Plus, cloning is not only legal in NS but clones have their own set of rights, as set down in a bill determined just for that.

NS has demonstrated it does not have an ethical problem with cloning by granting the clones themselves rights. This makes scientists cloning humans for evil experiments effectively a human rights violation. Thus, you can prosecute them for their actions even if this resolution is left in place.

These days your DNA could be extracted from saliva, hair, finger or toe nails, just about anything really. It being that easy - the people of your nation are now at risk of becoming science experiments - thanks to this resolution.

My people know this and have accepted the risk for what benefits they may recieve. I do not, however, believe my nation represents the majority, so this may be a very good point.

"By ensuring that peaceful and responsible scientists can research by their own accord, and in any nation they please, technology will move forward, and trade will increase."

To me, that spells disaster, "research by their own accord."

Note the words "peaceful and responsible" right before it. I wonder if those were put there for a reason?

There needs to be, for the love of humanity, certain restrictions in place so that these scientists do not become over empowered and step out of line.

I ask that this resolution be repealed. Thank you.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

I believe the words "peaceful and responsible" when it comes to describing the scientists allowed to "research by their own accord" is hinting at a set of regulations. You have to determine what scientists are peaceful and responsible and what scientists are not in order for that to apply. At least, that is how I interpret it.

Scientific freedom is what the entire world is based upon. Do you think we'd have automobiles today if millions of years ago the cave-dweller wasn't allowed to invent the wheel? Do you know how many people thought famous inventors throughout history were insane, but if they were not allowed to invent we wouldn't have things like the phone, the telivision, electricity? How about the fact that the entire eastern hemisphere would be totally unknown if the ship had never been invented because we weren't supposed to stay atop water and Columbus never found it?

Scientists have every right to freedom in their occupation just as much as anyone else. Just because there are controversial things they can do doesn't mean we should slander them. I'm sure many people are angry that in a high speed chase, police ean are allowed to break road laws to catch the criminal, but if we didn't allow them to do that, well, you can draw the obvious conclusion, can't you?

Scientists and Supporters,

Please DO NOT listen to this foolishness. Science must make progress or we will be stuck in an age of stagnation. Do not allow this person to fool you, without advancements in Science we will be stuck in the stone age. This proposal is pure nonsense. Please, I urge you, do not let this proposal pass!

Normally, I would agree with you, but I must do this. A logical arguement, no matter whether the logic was faulty, was laid out in the opening post. While I appreciate your efforts, I must ask that if you are going to call it "foolishness" you at least provide an arguement, beyond that one-word sentence, as to why it is such.

This is not intended to be hostile, just to ask you to provide more with your arguement.

We like the resolution you wish to repeal. You do not have our support.

Lady Desdemona of Merwell,
Senior UN representative,
The Black New World,
Delegate to The Order of The Valiant States

This is just an attempt to make my present resolution, which has been projected to win in a landslide victory, currently about 4:1, null and void. This is a personal vendetta against Embryonic Stem Cell Research, and Aliste is claery not interested in repealing Scientific Freedom. This is a sad, half-baked attempt to stop me, creative, but sad.

Please DO NOT listen to this foolishness.

Oh? And what is so foolish about it? That science becoming overempowered is a very real possibility and that when you do not set certain standards, regulations, and restrictions - science can in fact 'run a mok' ?

Science must make progress or we will be stuck in an age of stagnation.

Oh please! Now that is foolishness. There have always been regulations and restrictions - we've done pretty good so far.

The resolution is dangerous.

Do not allow this person to fool you, without advancements in Science we will be stuck in the stone age. This proposal is pure nonsense. Please, I urge you, do not let this proposal pass!

I'm not 'fool'ing anyone. I'm pointing out that it's a dangerous piece of legislation and must be repealed.

I do not know about you, but I do not want science running a mok. Cloning, creating half cow half human creatures, experimenting on living human beings (at least not without regulations, procedures, etc.), etc.

And what is wrong with cloning? If they are just cloning individual body parts, the issue of a soul is moot because they are not cloning a full being. Plus, cloning is not only legal in NS but clones have their own set of rights, as set down in a bill determined just for that.

What is wrong with cloning? Nothing, if you want to be cloned I suppose. The point is - science can clone you without you even knowing.

Using a piece of your hair, or a lolipop that you have thrown out. Without certain restrictions - this is a very real possibility.

Note the words "peaceful and responsible" right before it. I wonder if those were put there for a reason?

Come now, you're not that naive are you? Heh.

I believe the words "peaceful and responsible" when it comes to describing the scientists allowed to "research by their own accord" is hinting at a set of regulations. You have to determine what scientists are peaceful and responsible and what scientists are not in order for that to apply. At least, that is how I interpret it.

Well, I respect your opinion - truly I do. But I think it would be in the best interest of all of us if this resolution was repealed.

This is just an attempt to make my present resolution, which has been projected to win in a landslide victory, currently about 4:1, null and void. This is a personal vendetta against Embryonic Stem Cell Research, and Aliste is claery not interested in repealing Scientific Freedom. This is a sad, half-baked attempt to stop me, creative, but sad.

Actually, when I read the "Scientific Freedom" resolution - it became obvious to me it was dangerous.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

The United Sniper States of Draganovia:
we are shocked and appaled that you would suggest that we take away scientific freedom, we are cutting off all trade to your country as a result of this, we encourage scientific growth in our nation and would still do so if this bill were to somehow by some unthinkible way of being voted in.

Jason Wolfe, President of the USSD.

Draganovia,

Excuse me - but - who the hell are you?

The Armed Republic of Aliste has never even heard of you before.

Please, please do not cut off trade with us! Oh wait! (slams door in your face).

Nevermind. :D

Actually, when I read the "Scientific Freedom" resolution - it became obvious to me it was dangerous. That basically implies that you started out against me... heh heh : :)

That basically implies that you started out against me...

I'm not going to lie. When I was told that "Scientific Freedom" had already made embryonic stem cell research legal - I took a look at the resolution.

But it was more than that, I was frightened about cloning and science getting out of hand without certain restrictions.

Think of it like this (yes here comes an analogy), we can only hope that responsible and peaceful people own guns right - then there would be no one getting shot. But that is an unreal possibility - so we have restrictions, laws, etc.

Well the same is true for science. We need restrictions so that the scientists who are not responsible and not peaceful will not get out of hand.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

Actually, when I read the "Scientific Freedom" resolution - it became obvious to me it was dangerous.

Yes, you would know that. You know better then us.

Giordano,
UN representative,
The Black New World

These days your DNA could be extracted from saliva, hair, finger or toe nails, just about anything really. It being that easy - the people of your nation are now at risk of becoming science experiments - thanks to this resolution.
That is a direct Invasion of Privacy - no scientist could be permitted to do that without proper consent from the donor

"By ensuring that peaceful and responsible scientists can research by their own accord, and in any nation they please, technology will move forward, and trade will increase."
It states "responsible scientists" - so that means the people and government CAN hold them accountable

That is a direct Invasion of Privacy - no scientist could be permitted to do that without proper consent from the donor

Unfortunately, the restriction you are talking about is not included in the "Scientific Freedom" resolution.

In the resolution it states they have the right to 'research by their own accord.'

So technically - they can and are permitted.

It states "responsible scientists" - so that means the people and government CAN hold them accountable

That's wishful thinking. But unfortunately the resolution is sketchy and it is not as black and white as it could or should be.

It must be repealed.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

Unfortunately, the restriction you are talking about is not included in the "Scientific Freedom" resolution.

In the resolution it states they have the right to 'research by their own accord.'


By their own accord. Not by anyone else's. Unless the resolution clearly states that the scientists can experiment on people without their consent, then they aren't allowed.

By their own accord. Not by anyone else's. Unless the resolution clearly states that the scientists can experiment on people without their consent, then they aren't allowed.

Right, by their own accord. That means - no interference by the state.

And because of that, science can effectively 'run a mok'. :)

Researching cloning by extracting the DNA from another's toenail - is still 'researching by their own accord'. The toenail was simply provided to them by an unknowing citizen.

This is of course a scenario - but a very real possibility.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

What is wrong with cloning? Nothing, if you want to be cloned I suppose. The point is - science can clone you without you even knowing.

Using a piece of your hair, or a lolipop that you have thrown out. Without certain restrictions - this is a very real possibility.

But, I do not see anything in the resolution stating you cannot regulate it. In fact, from the wording of it I would say you have to regulate it.

Come now, you're not that naive are you? Heh.

Depends on how much sleep I've had.

Well, I respect your opinion - truly I do. But I think it would be in the best interest of all of us if this resolution was repealed.

Considering the wording, I think a better interest is to define it. What makes a peaceful scientist? What makes a responsible scientist? Those are both questions that, when you get right down to it, are up to the individual nations to regulate. There is no wording in this that states otherwise. So, I can regulate that a peaceful and responsible scientist only takes the genetic coding from volunteers who have been well-advised about what it is being used for.

Hobbies are good *snigger* :D

Edit: Im just kidding, dont mind little old sleep deprived me...

How about this.....

GeminiLand has been keeping half of it's population as virtual slaves by means of a scientifically created disease. This started around ten thousand years ago, and no one who is outside the government knows about it now.

A scientist in GeminiLand could find a cure, or at least be able to prove that this is going on. But sadly his research is subject to the will of the government, which - due to this repeal - has no desire to see the situation change. So no research on the disease is done, and half the population remains as virtual slaves.

Science can not be subject to political, religious or other measures - it must be free otherwise there is pretty much no point in having it.

Considering the wording, I think a better interest is to define it. What makes a peaceful scientist? What makes a responsible scientist? Those are both questions that, when you get right down to it, are up to the individual nations to regulate. There is no wording in this that states otherwise. So, I can regulate that a peaceful and responsible scientist only takes the genetic coding from volunteers who have been well-advised about what it is being used for.

Perhaps you are on to something there, DemonLordEnigma.

Perhaps I can propose a revisal of the resolution? So that science will be free but also held accountable?

The Armed Republic of Aliste is all for scientific freedom - but is fearful of there being not enough measures to hold the scientists accountable.

OOC: While youre here TilEnca, could you edit that post in my official thread, the one with the old copy of my proposal and replace it with the new one? The mods got mixed up and picked the old thread for the first proposal. Now everyones getting confused and Im losing support.

OOC: While youre here TilEnca, could you edit that post in my official thread, the one with the old copy of my proposal and replace it with the new one? The mods got mixed up and picked the old thread for the first proposal. Now everyones getting confused and Im losing support.

Oh - that post.

Can I suggest that you edit your first post and put it in there instead? And I will remove the quote from mine.

The only reason being that it's your proposal, and if you put it as the first thing in the thread more people will see it.

Also - put a copy as the next post in the thread - right at the end of where the thread currently is. That way EVEN MORE people will see it :}

lol, thanks

Perhaps you are on to something there, DemonLordEnigma.

Perhaps I can propose a revisal of the resolution? So that science will be free but also held accountable?

The Armed Republic of Aliste is all for scientific freedom - but is fearful of there being not enough measures to hold the scientists accountable.

Propose something that defines what makes a scientist peaceful and rersponsible. It's technically not a revision, and thus in the rules, while helping clear up the questions this one leaves behind.

Propose something that defines what makes a scientist peaceful and rersponsible. It's technically not a revision, and thus in the rules, while helping clear up the questions this one leaves behind.

DemonLordEnigma has shown me the error of my ways.

We've been going about this in entirely the wrong way. I'll propose something that will hold scientists accountable for their actions.

Thank you DemonLordEnigma, I hope after seeing my proposal which I will draft later - you will support it.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

Propose something that defines what makes a scientist peaceful and rersponsible. It's technically not a revision, and thus in the rules, while helping clear up the questions this one leaves behind.

And yet that still concerns me. Because the government can easily define responsible and peaceful as "do nothing ever, ever again and do it quietly"

And yet that still concerns me. Because the government can easily define responsible and peaceful as "do nothing ever, ever again and do it quietly"

TilEnca, I am proposing a resolution right now that will give science enough elbow room to work and not be stiffled - but also be held accountable should they cross a line.

Yeah, it has to be something resonable or you will not receive any support from those of us who support Scientif Freedom.

TilEnca, I am proposing a resolution right now that will give science enough elbow room to work and not be stiffled - but also be held accountable should they cross a line.

Who defines the line?

Please define the line that you do not wish science to cross, Aliste.

Give me a chance. The line will be defined by the U.N. member nations whether they adopt the resolution I propose or not. Heh.

Fine, then science will continue to be just as free as it was before you made this proposal in my Nation, and Im sure in other nations as well.

Fine, then science will continue to be just as free as it was before you made this proposal in my Nation, and Im sure in other nations as well.

I haven't drafted the proposal yet! Rofl! Cool your jets.

Before I propose it I will post it here on the forums.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

Fine

*huff* fine I don't care

Only when a balance and a compromise is found will you find support.

Rough draft:

Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act (SARA)

The Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act will immediately affect all member nations upon it being adopted.

1.) The scientific community of a nation must be held accountable for any wrong-doings. These 'wrong-doings' being defined as any action that the the scientific community engages in that defies the particular nation's laws.
2.) The scientific community of a nation is not above the law of that nation.
3.) If the nation so decides, it may cut funding to the scientific community - United Nation resolutions may not impede the nation's right to do so. However, the scientific community will always be able to recieve funds from the private sector if it so wishes.
4.) The scientific community may gather funds from the private sector, but this does not in any way give the scientific community the right to defy the nation's laws - once again.

Only when a balance and a compromise is found will you find support.

Scientists can clone humans on Monday though Wednesday, not Thursday through Saturday, and we split Sunday...how is that?

Scientists can clone humans on Monday though Wednesday, not Thursday through Saturday, and we split Sunday...how is that?

Haha. :p I like you Dresophila Prime.

Rough draft:

Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act (SARA)

The Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act will immediately affect all member nations upon it being adopted.

1.) The scientific community of a nation must be held accountable for any wrong-doings. These 'wrong-doings' being defined as any action that the the scientific community engages in that defies the particular nation's laws.
2.) The scientific community of a nation is not above the law of that nation.
3.) If the nation so decides, it may cut funding to the scientific community - United Nation resolutions may not impede the nation's right to do so. However, the scientific community will always be able to recieve funds from the private sector if it so wishes.
4.) The scientific community may gather funds from the private sector, but this does not in any way give the scientific community the right to defy the nation's laws - once again.

Sara is hot, but her features are a bit plain...I smell loopholes...

Sara is hot, but her features are a bit plain...I smell loopholes...

Loopholes? Hmmm. Interesting.

Yeah, I suppose you're right - the scientific community of a nation could be able to recieve funds from another nation.

EDIT...

5.) The scientific community of a nation may not recieve funds from another nation.

Yay? Nay?

Is the entire scientific community help accountable for the wrongdoings of a few rogues? Are the fundings cut right there?

Are not people punished for law infringements anyhow? To what scientific community are you referring?

Hmm, yes SARA looks alright, but air out the details and try to tie any loopholes.

Is the entire scientific community help accountable for the wrongdoings of a few rogues?

You're right - I didn't make that clear. I should make it clear that not the entire scientific community but just the few scientists.

Are the fundings cut right there?

Once again you're right - I should have made it clear what exactly the 'punishment' will be - that which the nation should probably decide.

Wasn't this initially meant to stop human cloning?

Wasn't this initially meant to stop human cloning?

No, the point of SARA is simply to allow nations decide what they want their rules and regulations to be.

REVISION: 1.) The scientific community of a nation must be held accountable for any wrong-doings. These 'wrong-doings' being defined as any action that the the scientific community engages in that defies the particular nation's laws. However, the entire scientific nation can not and will not be reprimanded on behalf of those directly responsible. Only those amongst the scientific community who are directly responsible for the wrong-doings will be reprimanded in accordance with the nation's laws.

Destroying the UN, one resolution at a time, breaking its grip on individual nations...nice, I agree...people should decide fo themselves what is right and wrong.

Rough draft, revised:

Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act (SARA)

The Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act will immediately affect all member nations upon it being adopted.

1.) The scientific community of a nation must be held accountable for any wrong-doings. These 'wrong-doings' being defined as any action that the the scientific community engages in that defies the particular nation's laws. However, the entire scientific community can not and will not be reprimanded on behalf of those directly responsible. Only those amongst the scientific community who are directly responsible for the wrong-doings will be reprimanded in accordance with the nation's laws.
2.) The United Nations' resolutions will not override the law of a nation.
3.) The scientific community of a nation is not above the law of that nation.
4.) If the nation so decides, it may cut funding to the scientific community - United Nation resolutions may not impede the nation's right to do so. However, the scientific community will always be able to recieve funds from the private sector if it so wishes.
5.) The scientific community may gather funds from the private sector, but this does not in any way give the scientific community the right to defy the nation's laws - once again.
6.) The scientific community of a nation may or may not recieve funds from other nations, this will be left up to the nations themselves whether or not they'd like for their scientific community to recieve funds from other nations.

Who defines the line?

I believe that would be tampering with humans without their consent.

So what does everyone think of the new revised proposal?

I think it draws the line - which is that the nations must decide for themselves. That U.N. resolutions cannot override the nation's specific laws.

Science will continue to run amok in my Nation! Yay! Now genetically Engineered Blobs from my nation can eat the people of Aliste! Hurrah!

Nykibo, are you for this resolution?

I will continue to edit it - but I think it's not bad - do you?

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

!! NEW DRAFT !!

Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act (SARA)

The Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act will immediately affect all member nations upon it being adopted.

1.) The scientific community of a nation must be held accountable for any wrong-doings. These 'wrong-doings' being defined as any action that the the scientific community engages in that defies the particular nation's laws. However, the entire scientific community can not and will not be reprimanded on behalf of those directly responsible. Only those amongst the scientific community who are directly responsible for the wrong-doings will be reprimanded in accordance with the nation's laws.
2.) The United Nations' resolutions that which concern science or medicine will not override the laws of a nation.
3.) The scientific community of a nation is not above the law of that nation.
4.) If the nation so decides, it may cut funding to the scientific community - United Nation resolutions may not impede the nation's right to do so. However, the scientific community will always be able to recieve funds from the private sector if it so wishes.
5.) The scientific community may gather funds from the private sector, but this does not in any way give the scientific community the right to defy the nation's laws - once again.
6.) The scientific community of a nation may or may not recieve funds from other nations, this will be left up to the nations themselves whether or not they'd like for their scientific community to recieve funds from other nations.

I believe that would be tampering with humans without their consent.

And who defines what tampering is, what humans are and how far you need to go to get their consent?

I know - I am stretching it a bit here. But if you apply this to science, it can be taken to apply to medicine (which is science) and if you are halfway through operating on someone and find out there is something you can fix, but you don't actually have consent to do that operation. Common sense would dictate that you cure it, then explain afterwards. But this would potentially prevent such a thing from happening.

Right, medicine is science. Which is why I put...

"2.) The United Nations' resolutions that which concern science or medicine will not override the laws of a nation."

Each country should be able to choose individually. Hell, if you want science to go crazy in your country then be my guest - but not in my country.

And I don't want the U.N. dictating laws concerning medicine and science.

Nykibo, are you for this resolution?

I will continue to edit it - but I think it's not bad - do you?

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

!! NEW DRAFT !!

Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act (SARA)

The Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act will immediately affect all member nations upon it being adopted.

1.) The scientific community of a nation must be held accountable for any wrong-doings. These 'wrong-doings' being defined as any action that the the scientific community engages in that defies the particular nation's laws. However, the entire scientific community can not and will not be reprimanded on behalf of those directly responsible. Only those amongst the scientific community who are directly responsible for the wrong-doings will be reprimanded in accordance with the nation's laws.
2.) The United Nations' resolutions that which concern science or medicine will not override the laws of a nation.
3.) The scientific community of a nation is not above the law of that nation.
4.) If the nation so decides, it may cut funding to the scientific community - United Nation resolutions may not impede the nation's right to do so. However, the scientific community will always be able to recieve funds from the private sector if it so wishes.
5.) The scientific community may gather funds from the private sector, but this does not in any way give the scientific community the right to defy the nation's laws - once again.
6.) The scientific community of a nation may or may not recieve funds from other nations, this will be left up to the nations themselves whether or not they'd like for their scientific community to recieve funds from other nations.

The only thing I have a concern with is (2) - UN Resolutions ALWAYS override national laws. I am not sure you can write a proposal that would let you say this can't be done, because it is a violation of game mechanics.

And putting science in the hands of the private sector instead of the government is a horrific idea (sorry - an horrific idea!).

Plus - again - science should not be subject to the will of the politicians. It should be free. I am not saying it should be used to torture, maim and kill, but what if the government says that curing AIDS is no longer something that can be researched, because all gays must burn in hell? That is not an acceptable thing for a government to be saying, especially on those grounds. And it would violate at least one UN resolution, which - as previously mentioned - is not permitted.

I really do understand what you are trying to do with this. But I think this proposal is illegal in one part, and ill advised in the rest.

The only thing I have a concern with is (2) - UN Resolutions ALWAYS override national laws. I am not sure you can write a proposal that would let you say this can't be done, because it is a violation of game mechanics.

Not 'ALWAYS' - if my nation sets restrictions on 'scientific freedom' - then the "Scientific Freedom" resolution will only partly apply.

And putting science in the hands of the private sector instead of the government is a horrific idea (sorry - an horrific idea!).

Actually, it isn't. If the scientific community needs funding it can look to the private sector for funds.

----------------------------------------------------

EDIT: I revised #2 to make it a bit clearer: "2.) The United Nations' resolutions that which concern science or medicine will not override the laws, restrictions, regulations, or procedures of a nation."

EDIT: I revised #2 to make it a bit clearer: "2.) The United Nations' resolutions that which concern science or medicine will not override the laws, restrictions, regulations, or procedures of a nation."

Not to correct you. But ALWAYS. This is why a nation can not ban gay marriage in contravention of Resolution #12 (Gay Rights) and why a nation can not let adults have sex with children (Outlaw Pedophilla) and why a nation can not let people keep slaves (The Slavery Resolution) and why a nation can not horribly abuse Prisoners of War (Wolfish Convention).

Would someone else back me up here? Nations can't pick and choose to override parts of a UN resolution just cause they don't like them, can they?

Not to correct you. But ALWAYS. This is why a nation can not ban gay marriage in contravention of Resolution #12 (Gay Rights) and why a nation can not let adults have sex with children (Outlaw Pedophilla) and why a nation can not let people keep slaves (The Slavery Resolution) and why a nation can not horribly abuse Prisoners of War (Wolfish Convention).

TilEnca, by correcting me - you are helping me. I take no offense to that and I thank you for being so helpful.

I am going to sleep on this - and think of something.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

TilEnca, by correcting me - you are helping me. I take no offense to that and I thank you for being so helpful.

I am going to sleep on this - and think of something.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

How am I helping you? You are trying to put forward a proposal that says "nations can pick and choose what they decide to pay attention to in UN rules" and I am saying "that's not true, your proposal is illegal and it will most likely get deleted"

It only counts as help if you pay attention and delete/edit/wipe the proposal off the face of the earth

How am I helping you? You are trying to put forward a proposal that says "nations can pick and choose what they decide to pay attention to in UN rules" and I am saying "that's not true, your proposal is illegal and it will most likely get deleted"

Well, I'll find a way to make my proposal legal.

Well, I'll find a way to make my proposal legal.

(grin) If you can manage it, then that is something I am willing to help with.

I realise we disagree on.... well on pretty much everything, but if you think you can find a way to write a legal proposal that I can support in good concience then I will be happy to help you with the details to make it legal. And (as dumb as this sounds) I will be happy to help bring it to the floor, even if I end up voting against it.

Democracy above all :}

At this point, I suppose I support SARA to some extent.

As it stands now, this is how SARA looks:

---------------------------------------------------

Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act (SARA)

The Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act will immediately affect all member nations upon it being adopted.

1.) The scientific community of a nation must be held accountable for any wrong-doings. These 'wrong-doings' being defined as any action that the the scientific community engages in that defies the particular nation's laws. However, the entire scientific community can not and will not be reprimanded on behalf of those directly responsible. Only those amongst the scientific community who are directly responsible for the wrong-doings will be reprimanded in accordance with the nation's laws.
2.) The United Nations' resolutions that which concern science or medicine will not override the laws, restrictions, regulations, or procedures of a nation.
3.) The scientific community of a nation is not above the law of that nation.
4.) If the nation so decides, it may cut funding to the scientific community - United Nation resolutions may not impede the nation's right to do so. However, the scientific community will always be able to recieve funds from the private sector if it so wishes.
5.) The scientific community may gather funds from the private sector, but this does not in any way give the scientific community the right to defy the nation's laws - once again.
6.) The scientific community of a nation may or may not recieve funds from other nations, this will be left up to the nations themselves whether or not they'd like for their scientific community to recieve funds from other nations.

---------------------------------------------------

I'd like input from everyone - please. Construvtive criticism, maybe ideas on how to make it more presentable (legal), etc.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

As it stands now, this is how SARA looks:

---------------------------------------------------

Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act (SARA)

The Scientific Accountability and Responsibility Act will immediately affect all member nations upon it being adopted.

1.) The scientific community of a nation must be held accountable for any wrong-doings. These 'wrong-doings' being defined as any action that the the scientific community engages in that defies the particular nation's laws. However, the entire scientific community can not and will not be reprimanded on behalf of those directly responsible. Only those amongst the scientific community who are directly responsible for the wrong-doings will be reprimanded in accordance with the nation's laws.


So, scientists in my country must obey my laws. Duh.



2.) The United Nations' resolutions that which concern science or medicine will not override the laws, restrictions, regulations, or procedures of a nation.


Illegal and will result in getting your proposal deleted and you warned.



3.) The scientific community of a nation is not above the law of that nation.


Duh.



4.) If the nation so decides, it may cut funding to the scientific community - United Nation resolutions may not impede the nation's right to do so. However, the scientific community will always be able to recieve funds from the private sector if it so wishes.


Illegal and will result in getting your proposal deleted and you warned.



5.) The scientific community may gather funds from the private sector, but this does not in any way give the scientific community the right to defy the nation's laws - once again.


Repetitive and duh.



6.) The scientific community of a nation may or may not recieve funds from other nations, this will be left up to the nations themselves whether or not they'd like for their scientific community to recieve funds from other nations.


Repetitive and duh.

Start again. You do not need to state the blatantly obvious and you cannot restrict what the UN can or cannot do.

"Duh."

Has anyone ever told you before that you're very, very, rude?

What next, "Talk to the hand!" ? Rofl. :p

And for the record, "I'd like input from everyone - please. Construvtive criticism, maybe ideas on how to make it more presentable (legal), etc."

None of that was constructive, and you gave me no ideas.

"Duh."

Has anyone ever told you before that you're very, very, rude?

What next, "Talk to the hand!" ? Rofl. :p

And for the record, "I'd like input from everyone - please. Construvtive criticism, maybe ideas on how to make it more presentable (legal), etc."

None of that was constructive, and you gave me no ideas.

In his defence he was just saying what I was, but in a slightly more forceful way :}

Two parts of your proposal are illegal under game rules, and will most likely get your proposal deleted. And while I have no problem with that, I do think you should be warned about it, because it can sometimes get your nation banned/ejected/deleted/obliterated. And even though I oppose you and everything you stand for I would rather you not be deleted because you overlooked one tiny thing.

Ah yes...so the UN is what powers your nation. Whatever they say, goes, and if your country does not adhere to the rules you are ejected.

Having a country with different laws than what the UN dictates is illegal...well seeing as I am in a UN forum on NationStates, I won't say much in fear of the omnipotent moderator but I'll say this.

"All your laws are belong to us"

Ah yes...so the UN is what powers your nation. Whatever they say, goes, and if your country does not adhere to the rules you are ejected.

Having a country with different laws than what the UN dictates is illegal...well seeing as I am in a UN forum on NationStates, I won't say much in fear of the omnipotent moderator but I'll say this.

"All your laws are belong to us"

Actually, you don't have a choice, the UN Gnomes change your laws for you if you aren't in compliance. They're very good at what they do.

And for the record, "I'd like input from everyone - please. Construvtive criticism, maybe ideas on how to make it more presentable (legal), etc."

None of that was constructive, and you gave me no ideas.


Start again. You do not need to state the blatantly obvious and you cannot restrict what the UN can or cannot do.

In other words, your proposal is either a waste of the UN's time, or illegal. You need to rethink what you are after, and restate your points.

You also must realize you cannot restrict the UN.

Vastiva, finally - some constructive criticism.

That wasn't so hard now was it?

Thanks - I guess Scientific Freedom just needs to be repealed. (sigh).

The resolution does *not* mandate that scientists be given funding by member nations, merely that responsible scientists be free to research (that the governments not pass laws impeding the work of responsible scientists). Given that much of scientific funding comes from the government, it is a government's responsibility to decide who to fund. Governments don't need research limitation laws, just to strictly decide where to put their research grants.

The Federation does not believe this resolution is necessary.

Meteor Impact Victims,

The Scientific Freedom resolution allows science to be above the law - in the name of 'research'.

Therefor it must be repealed.

If my nation wants to put restrictions on what it's scientists can and cannot do - it should be able to.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

The resolution does *not* mandate that scientists be given funding by member nations, merely that responsible scientists be free to research (that the governments not pass laws impeding the work of responsible scientists). Given that much of scientific funding comes from the government, it is a government's responsibility to decide who to fund. Governments don't need research limitation laws, just to strictly decide where to put their research grants.

The Federation does not believe this resolution is necessary.

*Standing Ovation*

Meteor Impact Victims,

The Scientific Freedom resolution allows science to be above the law - in the name of 'research'.

Therefor it must be repealed.

If my nation wants to put restrictions on what it's scientists can and cannot do - it should be able to.

The Armed Republic of Aliste.

That would be where I fundementally disagree with you :}

It could be interpreted to allow science to be above the law, in an extreme interpretation. It could also be interpreted, a more reasonable interpretation, that the government shall pass no laws to impede scientific research. The subtle difference is this: if scientific research clashes with laws that are not meant to impede it (privacy, theft, murder), under the first interpretation, it has impunity. Under the second, it must obey the laws, but nations just can't ban specific types of research. This is as it should be.

There is nothing in the resolution that leads to the conclusion that the FMIV interpretation is undeniably wrong and the other undoubtedly correct, or vice versa. Considering that it is a mild resolution, the one with the more mild effect is more likely.

Even if it puts scientists above the law, there are loopholes. It doesn't define a scientist, or science, leaving that to the nation. It doesn't mandate public funds, merely the freedom. A government could, theoretically, claim that for something to be science, in that nation's legal definition (as in, used in law) of the term, they must take the holy texts of the nation's major religion as absolute, literal truth. They could go further, and claim that the only science is the study of their holy texts.

Hmm, come to think of it, I'm beginning to support a repeal simply because the resolution is too vague, to allow it to be replaced with a more prescise resolution.

From experience - propose something more limiting, and you have a better chance of getting it through.

At last count, 63 attempts to repeal have been submitted, one has passed.