NationStates Jolt Archive

I am gaging support for a repeal of said Resolution, which, as pointed out, passed with an overwhelming majority. Despite this, I believe that this resolution does nothing for the reputation of the UN; it is of a caliber reminiscent of the resolution regarding DVDs, and should be removed in short order. That said, over 10,000 UN members lent their support, and I am interested in hearing their thoughts before I come to a decision whether or not to launch ahead with this repeal. I open up the floor.

Steve Perry
President
Republic of Teruchev

Unless someone cares to submit a proposed rewording of the resolution, I shall remain steadfast in support of it.

I have already proposed a repeal of the Sex Education Act. It is becoming tiresome that seemingly every resolution is judged on its ideals as opposed to the practicality of implementation and enforcement. While I can normally sigh and let that happen, this abuse of UN idealism was SO misguided and SO egregious that I had to act. I submitted my repeal proposal two days ago. Thw UN should not become a thought police, social shoehorn or an intrusion on the rights of member nations to determine for themselves issues of individual morality.

Thank you, Intangelon, for your comments. The Republic of Teruchev was made aware of your proposal by Sydia shortly after creating a discussion thread on the matter in the North Pacific forum. Rest assured that no attempt on our part was made towards co-opting your submission for repeal.

In regards to your remarks regarding the UN and this particular resolution, I could not agree more. Moreover, your comments regarding the need for emphasis on the practicality of implementation and enforcement have been well-heeded by Teruchev, and was a key component in my decision to float this proposal for public input.

As President, I welcome your further insights regarding this issue, and would relish the opportunity to work together on building an even stronger coalition to ensure that a future proposal for repeal regarding this resolution meets with unconditional success.

Steve Perry
President
Republic of Teruchev

Unless someone cares to submit a proposed rewording of the resolution, I shall remain steadfast in support of it.

Oh... ForgottenLands... This repeal comes as music to my ears. Think of how much debating me and you will go through here. Hold fast whilest I unpack. I will return with plenty of valid and critical points in leiu of this repeal.

I'm sure you will be there to "try" and dennounce them.
:rolleyes:

Oh... ForgottenLands... This repeal comes as music to my ears. Think of how much debating me and you will go through here. Hold fast whilest I unpack. I will return with plenty of valid and critical points in leiu of this repeal.

I'm sure you will be there to "try" and dennounce them.
:rolleyes:

Do you remember why I pulled out of our debate? Because it was bringing forth waaaaay too many bad memories. In the days both during and after our debate, I had spent a lot of time bringing forth memories and facts about my friends that I had rather hoped to forget, to remember the good times I had with them and the type of friends they had, not the families they lived in. I am not interested in engaging in another debate with you about this. My statement stands. There are some failings of the resolution, but it, overall, requires you to do nothing.

NO NATION IS REQUIRED TO TEACH SEX EDUCATION OR ANY TOPIC LISTED IN THE SEX EDUCATION ACT.

If it has any failings, it's to fail to list the biological components as recommended topics.

Thank you, ForgottenLands, for your comments.

While I recognize that it would seem more fruitful to make an attempt to repeal other resolutions with considerably more "teeth", I have decided to draw a metaphorical "line in the sand" on this particular resolution, as it, to me, symbolizes the "last straw" in my observations of UN resolutions over the past weeks and months.

To expound upon my last statement, I, in addition to feeling this resolution is unenforceable, believe that the caliber of resolutions needs to improve considerably, and perhaps the repeal of this resolution will send that message. That said, I understand NS is about a light-hearted and subversive take on real world institutions such as government and NGOs. However, I feel that more aspiring young political leaders would find this game more relevant if it were to lack at least some of the absurdity now present within.

True, it can be argued that real-world institutions are not without their own absurdities, but neither do I feel that we are best served with a pale caricature of the real thing.

Steve Perry
President
Republic of Teruchev

if it were to lack at least some of the absurdity now present within.


please, which exact point of the sex education act is absurd for you? :fluffle:

Thank you, Love and esterel, for joining in the discussion. I am seeking a discussion of all viewpoints on this matter, and it would be remiss without including the author of the resolution in question.

In response to your question, where you inquired as to where it was stated that the "Sex Education Act" was absurd, if you will review the middle part of the third paragraph, you will note that where I mention "absurdities" is in regards to the overall level of caricaturization as it relates to the NS UN. Your resolution was not in fact referred to in this manner, but upon closer inspection of the paragraph, it appears I should have used a qualifier instead of the word "within".

Rest assured that my efforts on this matter are not ill-willed: on the contrary, as I wrote in the North Pacific forum prior to your resolution's passing, I have no philosophical disagreement with the letter and spirit of the Act whatsoever. What is problematic is that the Act does not explain why sexual education should not be left to the relevant education departments of individual member states, or why sexual education is a matter of the highest international importance.

Steve Perry
President
Republic of Teruchev

Thank you, Love and esterel, for joining in the discussion. I am seeking a discussion of all viewpoints on this matter, and it would be remiss without including the author of the resolution in question.

In response to your question, where you inquired as to where it was stated that the "Sex Education Act" was absurd, if you will review the middle part of the third paragraph, you will note that where I mention "absurdities" is in regards to the overall level of caricaturization as it relates to the NS UN. Your resolution was not in fact referred to in this manner, but upon closer inspection of the paragraph, it appears I should have used a qualifier instead of the word "within".

If we wish to discuss wording, it should be noted that Love and Esterel is an ESL member. Wording issues probably should be directed at the various members who edited it - including myself. I don't think any of us claim to be English majors and there will always be things that we miss - especially when we are trying to edit both specifics and general issues simultaneously (and perhaps, the odd communication issue between ourselves and the author)

Rest assured that my efforts on this matter are not ill-willed: on the contrary, as I wrote in the North Pacific forum prior to your resolution's passing, I have no philosophical disagreement with the letter and spirit of the Act whatsoever.

The spirit of the resolution was passed, not the actual actions contained within - as signified by the actual wording of the resolution

What is problematic is that the Act does not explain why sexual education should not be left to the relevant education departments of individual member states,

It is left to the education departments. It is just urging the education departments to have these programs

or why sexual education is a matter of the highest international importance.

Steve Perry
President
Republic of Teruchev

Because basic curriculums are generally agreed upon (but hey, if the UN wants to get into issues where the world generally agrees already....we can do that) and evolution (one of only two topics more heavily discussed than the question of in-school sex education - the other being arts/cultural classes which I think the UN has so far not really decided one way or another on, nor do I think it will in the forseeable future) has already been addressed. As such, this one is next in line.

In response to your question, where you inquired as to where it was stated that the "Sex Education Act" was absurd, if you will review the middle part of the third paragraph, you will note that where I mention "absurdities" is in regards to the overall level of caricaturization as it relates to the NS UN. Your resolution was not in fact referred to in this manner

thank you, we appreciate what you said, and we apologize for our misanderstanding, thanks also to Forgottenlands

What is problematic is that the Act does not explain why sexual education should not be left to the relevant education departments of individual member states

the courses defined in the resolution can of course be integrated inside the national education program made mandatory by the UN Resolution #28 “Free Education”
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=27
there are no contradiction


why sexual education is a matter of the highest international importance

"
-D- Sex has two important functions: reproduction and pleasure
-E- Sexual activity is a common activity, contributing to the happiness of many people, worldwide
"

we think reproduction and hapiness are important, so sex and sex education are important; and as

"
-A- Sexual education is lacking
-B- Education about female sexuality is often unheard of and no mention is made of the clitoris, the statistically most erogenous zone for women, which is not directly correlated with reproduction
-C- Lack of quality sex education can lead, many times, to unplanned teen pregnancies and unnecessary abortion
"
we were thinking there was something of highest international importance to do

we hope this can answer to your questions

Many thanks are in order to Forgottenlands and Love and esterel for their timely and thoughtful replies. I will make an attempt to address every issue discussed between the two respondents, but cannot guarantee it.

Rest assured, Forgottenlands, that no attempt was made on the part of the Republic of Teruchev to belittle anyone's command of the English language, especially any individual who speaks it as a second language.

Further, I am fully aware that this resolution is largely of an advisory nature, and I reiterate my understanding that the author(s) consider it to be a matter of international importance. This is perhaps where the opinions of myself and Forgottenlands diverge, each of us having a different view as to the role of the UN in domestic jurisdiction.

The Teruchev government is building a coalition within the UN of likeminded nations that aspire to return the UN to its original purpose of global community, peace, and non-ideologically driven dialogue. This coalition does not envision a role for the UN as an organization involved in a social engineering role.

Thank you again for your comments. I fully respect that you may not agree with my stated goals, and am confident that we can find common ground on these matters.

Steve Perry
President
Republic of Teruchev

thank you for your post, we don't agree with but understand your aspiration about UN purposes

Many thanks are in order to Forgottenlands and Love and esterel for their timely and thoughtful replies. I will make an attempt to address every issue discussed between the two respondents, but cannot guarantee it.

Rest assured, Forgottenlands, that no attempt was made on the part of the Republic of Teruchev to belittle anyone's command of the English language, especially any individual who speaks it as a second language.

I understand that was not your intention, I was merely stating that I do not wish to get into a discussion about word choice due to the considerations listed. That said, I thank you for not pursuing the matter regardless

Further, I am fully aware that this resolution is largely of an advisory nature, and I reiterate my understanding that the author(s) consider it to be a matter of international importance. This is perhaps where the opinions of myself and Forgottenlands diverge, each of us having a different view as to the role of the UN in domestic jurisdiction.

Yes, you may wish to speak with Texan Hotrodders.

The Teruchev government is building a coalition within the UN of likeminded nations that aspire to return the UN to its original purpose of global community, peace, and non-ideologically driven dialogue.

I would love to know what you mean by "return to". The first resolution we ever passed was ideologically driven and numerous resolutions (that have since been deleted) were passed that pretty much admonished the actual delegates of the UN. Before the former and perhaps the latter resolutions were removed, the UN passed resolutions that set ideological beliefs on Abortion, Same Sex marriage, and Euthanasia - to name a few - as well as various economic and environmental policies. As such, the UN, from the moment of its birth, has been pushing ideological policies over and over. Various resolutions that had been put forth (especially near the beginning) almost made it so we were legislating socialism.

There is no "back to" to go to.

This coalition does not envision a role for the UN as an organization involved in a social engineering role.

That is a difference in opinion

Thank you again for your comments. I fully respect that you may not agree with my stated goals, and am confident that we can find common ground on these matters.

Steve Perry
President
Republic of Teruchev

That said, your position of the UN has no business conducting Social Engineering is not an unvalid belief, so I hope there is no misunderstanding in thinking I was trying to say otherwise.

Do you remember why I pulled out of our debate? Because it was bringing forth waaaaay too many bad memories. In the days both during and after our debate, I had spent a lot of time bringing forth memories and facts about my friends that I had rather hoped to forget, to remember the good times I had with them and the type of friends they had, not the families they lived in. I am not interested in engaging in another debate with you about this. My statement stands. There are some failings of the resolution, but it, overall, requires you to do nothing.

NO NATION IS REQUIRED TO TEACH SEX EDUCATION OR ANY TOPIC LISTED IN THE SEX EDUCATION ACT.

If it has any failings, it's to fail to list the biological components as recommended topics.
I am sorry. I didnt realize you pulled out of it due to personal attachments. The reason you told me was due to the "drain" of debating against me.

You arent the only one that has "personal" feelings behind this however. Im not taking away from you or your life in any way, Im just saying there are valid issues I brought up due to seeing some of the negative effects on my family and even myself as well.

I wont argue this with you at all. I'll let this one negotiate on its own.

I do this out of respect... not fear.

Thanks once again to Love and esterel and Forgottenlands for their insightful and thought-provoking comments regarding the proposal in question.

In regards to the post by Forgottenlands, some clarifying remarks are in order. As per my comments on the UN: these remarks were in reference to the real-world United Nations. I am a relative newcomer to NS; while being under no illusions about the early days of the NS UN, which as its first act passed an Axis of Evil knock-off, I have perhaps not fully immersed myself in this alternate universe and am lurching back and forth between the two.

That said, I will continue to engage in dialogue with a multitude of nations espousing varying perspectives on the matter. Do not feel as though this Act is being unfairly targeted for repeal, for it has merely arrived on the scene when a critical mass of concern to resolutions of this nature has developed. In order to ensure that everyone's interests are met, there can be no substitute for vigorous discussion, or, if necessary, grassroots political action.

Steve Perry
President
Republic of Teruchev