NationStates Jolt Archive

For reference, this is resoultion #2:
Scientific Freedom

A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Genius

Description: The people of Genius have long stood for Scientific freedom. 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.

I have submitted the following proposal to the UN and humbly ask for your support:

Acknowledging that Scientific Freedom in the best of circumstances is a good thing, this resolution should be repealed on the grounds that it is too broad. It implies that scientists should be allowed to do research on whatever they want, whenever they want.

There are no set definitions as to what constitutes "peaceful and responsible" scientists so what one nation may consider to be acceptable may not be acceptable to another.

Along the same lines, nations should be able to choose what research is acceptable and what is not. Should a nation choose not to allow certain types of research in their country then they should be allowed to refuse entry to scientists who engage in such activites.

I won't support a repeal of Scientific Freedom until I see a decent replacement. I know the Federal Republic will likely invade us for this; so be it. But I do think scientific cooperation is an international issue worthy of UN consideration, and whilst the original, as you say, is much too vague, I'd like to be assured at least some progress on a better system is underway.

Perhaps this would be a great opportunity for you to write a proposal that we could get behind as well. Be a spiffy one-two punch, so to speak.

As a great believer of practical, detailed and useful resolutions I have no qualms about supporting this repeal. However we also believe in the intent of this resolution, to promote scientific research. But we also believe in the right of Governments to make their own legislation in regards to certain topics of research particularily controversial topcs such as stem cell research or Genetic Engineering. To these purposes I am currently working on a potential replacement for "Scientific Freedom".

Yours Truly, John McKay
Ambassador to the UN

I agree that resolution 2 is extremely vague, and should be repealed....However how could you more specificaly identify "Scientific Freedom"?

Maybe something along the lines of:

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

(a) No scientist may create or research technology for the "implicit purpose" of causing harm.

(b)Scientists must act in accordance with ethical and moral scientific laws of their own Nation-State or those reccomended by the UN

2. Not withstanding the prior 2 conditions, Scientists may research freely and by their own accord


ok I see the flaws in this...But i think the issue is we need to put down some specific guidlines that define the specifics of those freedoms...and when they do not apply..

I'm working on something kind of similar with my proposal for "Genetics: Ethical Research and Human Advancement" which is open for debate in teh forums

I'm less interested in mandating how scientists work. That's a national issue. I'd be more concerned with facilitating international cooperation in sciences. There is no universal code of ethics; imposing one would not work.

Bazalonia']To these purposes I am currently working on a potential replacement for "Scientific Freedom".

Excellent! This will be a refreshing change. Something gets repealed and then it actually has legislation to replace it.

But first, endorse the proposal so we can clear the way for new ideas! :-)

My staffers and I have been working on the first draft for the replacement resolution and we would like to present to interested persons what we have developed. We believe this encourages trade in scientific ideas, supporting scientists in developing new technologies and devices, while still giving governments descretion in determining acceptible areas of research for their own nation. Attached is a copy of this draft.

Yours Sincerly, John McKay
Ambassador to the UN


Freedom for Scientific Research

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Mild

RECOGNISING the many benefits of scientific research such as:
- Medical Drugs, procedures and practices
- More environmentally friendly technologies
- More efficient and effective time-saving devices

BELIEVING that scientists should be able to research any legal topic without undue restrictions on the research or the results of that research.

UNDERSTANDING that scientific advances that are made for the betterment of the life of any persons should be available to all UN nations

DEFINES 'home-grown scientific endeavour' for the purpose of this resolution, as any scientific theory, procedure, law or any goods derived from such process within the UN Member nation, not including any weapons, weapon components, weapon systems, blueprints or technologies whose purpose is of a destructive purpose.

DEFINES 'scientific equipment' as any equipment used to aide in scientific research.

DEFINES 'areas of research' for the purpose of this resolution, as any topic, methodology or practice that is to be researched or can be used during the research process.

HEREBY

STRONGLY ENCOURAGES Governments to streamline procedures for the exporting of home-grown scientific endeavours, however ensuring that whoever, whether it be an individual or a type of organisation, has the right to export said material.

SUPPORTS governments' rights to regulate or prohibit distribution of explosives or other dangerous materials, such as radioactive isotopes.

SUPPORTS governments' rights to determine whether certain areas of research are illegal or not.

MANDATES that any scientist wishing to conduct research in an area that is illegal in their home nation may relocate (as well as their spouse and/or children) to another UN Member nation that does not have bans on such research

ENCOURAGES governments to loosen restrictions placed on scientific research by...
a. Removing all restrictions on where scientific research can take place, excluding basic safety requirements.
b. Removing all restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substancial safety issues involved.
c. Re-evaluating restrictions on materials used during scientific research and remove or loosen restrictions on as many materials as it is safe to do so

Could you toggle the [CODE] brackets to [QUOTE]?

Done.... Is there a way to preserve the formatting (ie tabs) without using code?

I don't think so. You could try using [indent]?

EDIT: I should add I think this looks very, very good. I have one or two comments, but for now it gets a definite thumbs-up from me.

Bazalonia']Done.... Is there a way to preserve the formatting (ie tabs) without using code?
Well, a lot of formatting beyond new lines wouldn't show up when you actually submit it, so I'd suggest avoiding it.

(a) No scientist may create or research technology for the "implicit purpose" of causing harm.

This would harm the economies of those nations that have significant armaments industries...

SUPPORTS governments rights to regulate or prohibit distribution of explosives or other dangerous materials, such as radioactive isotopes.

SUPPORTS governments rights to determine whether certain areas of research are illegal or not.


governments'

A quick point of contention...


b. Removing all restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substancial safety issues involved.

I would think you might want to throw 'financial' consideration in there too, as a government certainly won't provide unlimited funding to scientists.

I think you may need to lose this line, or rename the proposal..

SUPPORTS governments' rights to determine whether certain areas of research are illegal or not.

Under that giant loophole, governments can effectivly ban all scientific research.

The meat of the resolution which strongly supports governments rights for two clauses, then weakens when it gets to the scientists such as...

ENCOURAGES governments to loosen restrictions placed on scientific research by...
a. Removing all restrictions on where scientific research can take place, excluding basic safety requirements.
b. Removing all restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substancial safety issues involved.
c. Re-evaluating restrictions on materials used during scientific research and remove or loosen restrictions on as many materials as it is safe to do so

makes this proposal look to me more like a document giving government rights to restrict scientific research, then asks them nicely not to. The title of the resolution and what's actually in it seems a bit contradictory to me.

I won't support a repeal of Scientific Freedom until I see a decent replacement. I know the Federal Republic will likely invade us for this; so be it. But I do think scientific cooperation is an international issue worthy of UN consideration, and whilst the original, as you say, is much too vague, I'd like to be assured at least some progress on a better system is underway.

I'm rendered briefly speechless at hearing these words from the honourable delegate of Gruenberg. Has he at last shown an inclination for International Federalism?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

ENCOURAGES governments to loosen restrictions placed on scientific research by...
a. Removing all restrictions on where scientific research can take place, excluding basic safety requirements.

I'm somewhat concerned by this clause, in that I feel that there are some areas of scientific research where pressing ethical considerations ought to be included, i.e. certain areas of cloning research. Shouldn't a consideration of this be included?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

I'm rendered briefly speechless at hearing these words from the honourable delegate of Gruenberg. Has he at last shown an inclination for International Federalism?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.
Not if he knows what's good for him.*cracks knuckles*

Bob Flibble
NSO Mafia Don

There are two potential problems with this:

1) This allows the free flow of trade secrets. If this were allowed you could hire away my automobile scientists and be able to build my alternative fuel vehicles. I do not like this at all. There must be room for commercial non-disclosure agreements for international companies. I wish to protect my home industries. Patent protection must be addressed in this issue. Scientists must agree to change projects and limit disclosure when moving to a foreign power.

2) Allowing free flow of weapon scientists is a problem at best. This allows scientists to move to rogue nations. I would mind if one of my high energy physicists, or nuclear engineers moved to an enemy nation. Plus it may release classified information on special projects.

This would harm the economies of those nations that have significant armaments industries...

The people of Cluichstan note the same problem.

I'm rendered briefly speechless at hearing these words from the honourable delegate of Gruenberg. Has he at last shown an inclination for International Federalism?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Gruenberg was never an all out National Sovereigntist. His priorities just tended to lean that way.

I'm rendered briefly speechless at hearing these words from the honourable delegate of Gruenberg. Has he at last shown an inclination for International Federalism?
No. However, scientific research benefits all nations, and international collaboration in research is an international issue. I would still oppose UN interference in terms of national scientific research laws, such as safety systems or codes of ethics, but I'm all for promoting more dialogue between nations in researching new medicines, computers and deadly weaponry.

Under that giant loophole, governments can effectivly ban all scientific research.

The meat of the resolution which strongly supports governments rights for two clauses, then weakens when it gets to the scientists such as...


Combined with the following clause...

MANDATES that any scientist wishing to conduct research in an area that is illegal in their home nation may relocate (as well as their spouse and/or children) to another UN Member nation that does not have bans on such research


Nations have to really ask themselves why they are banning areas of research and if it is for a major ethical reason or risk losing scientists to other nations that do allow that area of research. And in regards for a nation banning all scientific research? while that is certainly regretable it is still the nations right to do so but in doing so they will effectively exile all scientists as well. Leaving the nation in question in the dark ages (by governmental choice) but still not effecting net global science.


I'm somewhat concerned by this clause, in that I feel that there are some areas of scientific research where pressing ethical considerations ought to be included, i.e. certain areas of cloning research. Shouldn't a consideration of this be included?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.


Thank you for your consideration of this proposal, In relation to cloning we share your position on cloning and cloning is anathematic to many religions as well as private citizens within our borders. However we also are a strong beleiver in Nation Soveriegnty, thus allowing nations the opportunity to make bad decisions, We hope to be there and encourage other other nations to make the right decisions all the time supporting the nations ability to make their own mind.


There are two potential problems with this:

1) This allows the free flow of trade secrets. If this were allowed you could hire away my automobile scientists and be able to build my alternative fuel vehicles. I do not like this at all. There must be room for commercial non-disclosure agreements for international companies. I wish to protect my home industries. Patent protection must be addressed in this issue. Scientists must agree to change projects and limit disclosure when moving to a foreign power.

2) Allowing free flow of weapon scientists is a problem at best. This allows scientists to move to rogue nations. I would mind if one of my high energy physicists, or nuclear engineers moved to an enemy nation. Plus it may release classified information on special projects.


It was never our intention to include the weapons trade in this proposal for it is hardely something that fits with the purpose of this resolution. My staffers will modify the resolution to take your comments into account. Thank you for your contribution to this Proposal.

Thank you all for your interest, comments and questions. I hope my answers the questions have satisfied your queries. Once again I thank all of you.

Yours Sincerly, John McKay
Ambassador to the UN

To those interested, here is a second draft of the proposal


Freedom for Scientific Research

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Mild

RECOGNISING the many benefits of scientific research such as:
- Medical Drugs, procedures and practices
- More environmentally friendly technologies
- More efficient and effective time-saving devices

BELIEVING that scientists should be able to research any legal topic without undue restrictions on the research or the results of that research.

UNDERSTANDING that scientific advances that are made for the betterment of the life of any persons should be available to all UN nations

DEFINES 'home-grown scientific endeavour' for the purpose of this resolution, as any scientific theory, procedure, law or any goods derived from such process within the UN Member nation, not including any weapons, weapon components, weapon systems, blueprints or technologies whose purpose is of a destructive purpose.

DEFINES 'scientific equipment' as any equipment used to aide in scientific research.

DEFINES 'areas of research' for the purpose of this resolution, as any topic, methodology or practice that is to be researched or can be used during the research process.

HEREBY

STRONGLY ENCOURAGES Governments to streamline procedures for the exporting of home-grown scientific endeavours, however ensuring that whoever, whether it be an individual or a type of organisation, has the right to export said material.

SUPPORTS governments' rights to regulate or prohibit distribution of explosives or other dangerous materials, such as radioactive isotopes.

SUPPORTS governments' rights to determine whether certain areas of research are illegal or not.

MANDATES that any scientist wishing to conduct research in an area that is illegal in their home nation may relocate (as well as their spouse and/or children) to another UN Member nation that does not have bans on such research

ENCOURAGES governments to loosen restrictions placed on scientific research by...
a. Removing all restrictions on where scientific research can take place, excluding basic safety requirements.
b. Removing all restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substancial safety issues involved.
c. Re-evaluating restrictions on materials used during scientific research and remove or loosen restrictions on as many materials as it is safe to do so

Gruenberg was never an all out National Sovereigntist. His priorities just tended to lean that way.

The people of Cluichstan lean that way as well, yet we see great value in international scientific cooperation. We still, however, would like to see the weapons prohibitions stricken from this proposal.

"SUPPORTS governments' rights to determine whether certain areas of research are illegal or not."

This needs to be broadened, to include the governments' rights to determine whether certain methods of research are illegal or not as well.

Then again, I suppose this could be amended by including a definition of "areas of research".

The people of Cluichstan lean that way as well, yet we see great value in international scientific cooperation. We still, however, would like to see the weapons prohibitions stricken from this proposal.

As a replacement proposal, we at the Bazalonian UN Office believe that we do not have the right to modify the underlying intent of the proposal, and that was to encourage peacful science by reducing restrictions placed upon it and encourage trade of scientific ideas or direct results from said research. As a result weapons and other destructive technologies are not meant to be addressed. How does this ban international weapons trading? It just does not "STRONGLY ENCOURAGE" the trade in such technologies. If the people of Cluichstan do wish to have a UN proposal that would like to encourage trade of items specifically excluded from this proposal then may I respectfully suggest that their representative in the UN draft a proposal that does and submit said proposal to the UN.



This needs to be broadened, to include the governments' rights to determine whether certain methods of research are illegal or not as well.

Then again, I suppose this could be amended by including a definition of "areas of research".


Thank you for raising this, though we are currently not sure it is as simple as that. We will think about it and let you know. Thank you

Yours Sincerly, John McKay
Ambassador to the UN

A quick point of contention...


b. Removing all restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substancial safety issues involved.

I would think you might want to throw 'financial' consideration in there too, as a government certainly won't provide unlimited funding to scientists.


Sorry for not getting back to you sooner. All equipment is obtainable, but that does not mean that the government have been given the responsibility to make it obtainable at no cost. Science research will still need to be funded either by the scientist themselves, by the community or some organisation such as a company or a government agency. The scientist is limited by how much money they have access to, not by how much money governments have access to. Thank You.

Yours Sincerly, John McKay
Ambassador to the UN

Bazalonia']As a replacement proposal, we at the Bazalonian UN Office believe that we do not have the right to modify the underlying intent of the proposal, and that was to encourage peacful science by reducing restrictions placed upon it and encourage trade of scientific ideas or direct results from said research. As a result weapons and other destructive technologies are not meant to be addressed. How does this ban international weapons trading? It just does not "STRONGLY ENCOURAGE" the trade in such technologies. If the people of Cluichstan do wish to have a UN proposal that would like to encourage trade of items specifically excluded from this proposal then may I respectfully suggest that their representative in the UN draft a proposal that does and submit said proposal to the UN.



Thank you for raising this, though we are currently not sure it is as simple as that. We will think about it and let you know. Thank you

Yours Sincerly, John McKay
Ambassador to the UN

My apologies. The clause in question is not in the proposal but was suggested by the representative from Windomir.

Bazalonia']
Thank you for raising this, though we are currently not sure it is as simple as that. We will think about it and let you know. Thank you

Yours Sincerly, John McKay
Ambassador to the UN

Rest assured, however "simple" you may find it or not find it, The Republic of Grand Maritoll cannot support a resolution which does not provide a means by which a soverign government can ban particular research methods.

The people of the Republic of Grand Maritoll are adament that they will not support a government which allows scientist free reign to practice whatever barbaric scientific methods they choose, including testing on the sacred plants and animals of our nation.

The threat of an uprising, combined with my personal stance and the stance of Kinjion, Lord of Grand Maritoll, cause me to declare my opposition to the proposed resolution in its current form.

Rest assured, however "simple" you may find it or not find it, The Republic of Grand Maritoll cannot support a resolution which does not provide a means by which a soverign government can ban particular research methods.

The people of the Republic of Grand Maritoll are adament that they will not support a government which allows scientist free reign to practice whatever barbaric scientific methods they choose, including testing on the sacred plants and animals of our nation.

The threat of an uprising, combined with my personal stance and the stance of Kinjion, Lord of Grand Maritoll, cause me to declare my opposition to the proposed resolution in its current form.

Do not be alarned, the final version will not require you to allow testing or research to be done in such barbarity. Even the proposal in it's current form does not prevent you from doing so. The proposal encourages government to remove restrictions on where scientific research can take place, obtaining equipment, and dealing with materials used in research. It does not mention these scientific methods at all and so the status quo is still in effect. After considering a number of issues including(but not limited to) national sovereignty, standards in science, what is the intent of the proposal and what should happen to scientists that want to be barbaric. This has not been an easy choice to make but we will add a definition of "areas of research" to include such things. This was our decision after much soul searching and deliberation. While we abhor barbarity in any form it has been known in the past that scientists have done so. And while we would like nothing better to outlaw all of this through the UN we feel that such action would be hypocritical, however we could just not leave it at the status quo either, the intent of the proposal needed to be preserved and so defining "areas of research" to include such areas will protect the integrity of the proposal. So as you can see while the solution is a reasonably easy solution the process that came to it was not. Thank you.

Yours Sincerly, John McKay
Ambassador to the UN

Bazalonia']Thank you.

And the Government of Grand Maritoll thanks you for amending your resolution to accommodate our concerns.


Jacob Spatz,
President Perpetua

This message is endorsed by His Lordship Kinjion. May he reign over Grand Maritoll eternally and the whole world eventually.

The steps people are taking to write a new and improved Scientific Freedom proposal are nothing short of fabulous. It's really really great.

However, it may all be in vain (at least put on hold temporarily) if we don't repeal the original, flawed, version first.

Time is running out on the vote. I urge you all to head over to the UN page and vote for this proposal before it expires. Voting expires today!

Scince is a right, and no a privilege. Scientests should not be restrained from helping the human race. Already we are tightening a grip, which should be a hand pushing progress forward. Give scientific freedom more rights. Even the right to become a superior religion, (Something furry, like a squirrel) be it. Science is superior to any other force, idea or other thing in this world. Without science you could not propose a repeal. Oppose it. Free the scientests, release them to the labarotories.

Scince is a right, and no a privilege. Scientests should not be restrained from helping the human race. Already we are tightening a grip, which should be a hand pushing progress forward. Give scientific freedom more rights. Even the right to become a superior religion, (Something furry, like a squirrel) be it. Science is superior to any other force, idea or other thing in this world. Without science you could not propose a repeal. Oppose it. Free the scientests, release them to the labarotories.

We agree, that is why there is a replacement proposal all good and ready... the thing is governments have the right to say "Not these specific areas", but if they do the scientists who wish to practice science in these areas must be allowed to go to somewhere they can. Please note that support for such positions are passive, where all other measures are active "MANDATES", "ENCOURAGES" and "STRONGLY ENCOURAGES". All the active clauses actually benefit scientists by reducing restrictions placed on things associated with Scientific research and encouraging trade of the results of said research. In this replacement proposal... everybody wins!

Well, last day of voting for it. Didn't get enough. But that's okay. I'll keep re-submitting it. Maybe it'll go to the floor and get passed about the same time the new scientific resolution proposal gets ready to go.