NationStates Jolt Archive

This proposal has already gone through a number of revisions within a repeal Scientific Freedom, and I thought I'd give it it's own thread.

Edited
Freedom of Scientific Research

Category: Human Rights
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,

The United Nations General Assembly hereby,

1. DEFINES for the purposes of this resolution:
- 'home-grown scientific endeavour' as any scientific theory, procedure, law or any goods derived from scientific research within that UN Member nation, not including any weapons, weapon components, weapon systems, blueprints or technologies whose purpose is of a destructive nature.
- 'scientific research' as one or more experiments carried out under the methodology of the Scientific Method to gain data and test a hypothesis,
- 'scientific equipment' as any equipment used to aid in scientific research.
- 'areas of research' as any topic, methodology or practice that is to be researched or can be used during the research process,
- 'scientist' as any person performing scientific research in an honest and straightforward manner with both the government as well as any person taking part in the scientific research

2. ENCOURAGES nations to promote research into any legal area of research without placing unnecessesary restrictions on that research or any home-grown scientific endeavours resultant from such research;

3. MANDATES that governments take the following steps to facilitate scientific research by:
a. ensure that there are no uncessary restrictions for buildings where scientific research is performed, apart from restrictions that ensure safety of the building, the people in it and the environment around it.
b. ensure that obtaining adequate scientific equipment is not prohibited or excessively hampered by government regulations, excluding circumstances where there are specific and substantial safety issues involved,
c. reevaluate restrictions on materials used during scientific research and remove or loosen restrictions on as many materials as it is safe to do so;

4. STRONGLY ENCOURAGES governments to streamline policies and procedures for the legal exportation of home-grown scientific endeavours, taking into account international and national Intellectual Property laws;

5. MANDATES that any scientist wishing to conduct research in an area of research that is illegal in their home nation may relocate (as well as their Immediate family) to another UN Member nation that does not have bans on such scientific research and is willing to accept their family and them;

6. REITERATES governmental rights to determine whether certain areas of research are legal or illegal within their sovereign territory;

7. REITERATES governmental rights to regulate or prohibit distribution of explosives or other dangerous materials, such as radioactive isotopes;

Co-authored by: Ceorana

I'd like the removal of "all" in clauses 5a and 5b: obviously, we're going to say that you can't conduct a hazardous experiment in pristine wilderness.

I've modified the 5a & 5b

Looks good to me!

Now we just need to get the damn thing repealed......

I suggest that definitions of undue restrictions be firmly established and the definition for areas of research be further defined so it is not so vague as to be utterly immaterial.

I suggest that definitions of undue restrictions be firmly established and the definition for areas of research be further defined so it is not so vague as to be utterly immaterial.

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

This clause is apart of the pre-amble and was not meant to be actionable, as such vagueries in this clause do not affect the implementation of the proposal just the reasoning behind it.

My suggested amendments are in bold:

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 [removed comma] 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 aid in scientific research.

DEFINES 'areas of research' for the purpose of this resolution [removed comma] 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. [please see below]

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 or loosening of restrictions on where scientific research can take place, excluding basic safety requirements.
b. Removing or loosening of restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substantial safety issues involved.
c. Re-evaluating restrictions on materials used during scientific research and removing or loosening restrictions on as many materials as [removed 'it'] is safe to do so.
___________________________________________

Regarding the 'STRONGLY ENCOURAGES' clause, I'm not sure what you're trying to say with the second part of the statement; it's not very clear as it stands. Also, I don't think the amendments to parts a and b of the final clause properly address Ceorana's concerns regarding environmental protection.

You're likely to receive our support for this proposal. Good luck.

Lata Chakrabarti
Speaker to the UN

Corrected grammar and spelling errors
Reworded the end of clause 1.
modified clause 5a

Firstly, I like it. Secondly, I'd suggest 'Freedom of Scientific Research', rather than 'for'.

Thirdly, the punctuation is a little wayward. What I would advise is this: put commas (,) after each preambulatory clause (ING words) up to HEREBY; put semi-colons (;) after each operative clause after HEREBY.

Finally:
ENCOURAGES governments to loosen restrictions placed on scientific research by...
Change the elision marks to a colon ('research by:')

Otherwise, I have no major problems with it.

As long as this doesn't state what science is, it's useless.

Furthermore, it doesn't do much except allow scientists to move country. I'm not sure whether this is already legislated in the UN, but in that case this resolution could just as easily be replaced by a resolution which allows people to migrate to any UN member.

So it's nice, but it'll need a lot of improvement in the basic thoughts behind it.

In my proposal I also tried to incorporate some things about intellectual property, on suggestion by others. Strictly speaking, it's not legal in my nation to publish scientific research which has been plagiarised. What if scientists try to evade punishment by "relocating"?

*SNIP* Strictly speaking, it's not legal in my nation to publish scientific research which has been plagiarised. What if scientists try to evade punishment by "relocating"?

The clause you discuss only deals with actually participating in research. Whoever I agree there is the chance that this clause will be used as a loophole for scientists to go to nations such as yours. However this is an important safeguard within this proposal and such usage of loopholes by individuals should not be a concern of the UN. As such this clause will stay.

I would suggest making this a "Human Rights" resoution instead of a "free trade" resolution.

Also I think there should be a clause banning the use of human beings against their will, futhermore even consent of children should be required, not just their parents'. Except for infants in developmental research, provided it is completely safe.

OOC: Human experimentation is not unheard, even in western countries. I read in Newsweek that in an experiment they gave boys female hormones to see if caused differences in their skills.

IC: Here is the statement I made as Economic Sovereignty Coalition director on the UNO forum:
It is with great pleasure that I announce that "Scientific Freedom" has been repealed. The resolution limited the progress of many socialist nations toward equality. The resolution did not have any definition of peaceful or responsible. It did not show any concern for ethics. I would like to see this resolution replaced in one or many resolutions. I want to see a resolution ensuring scientific freedom within limits. I also want a resolution banning non-consentual human experimentation. That should unite the far right and far left. I wish for this issue to be one of human rights, not of free trade.

My concern is that this resolution doesn't guarantee all that much freedom. While nations ought to be able to regulate science to some degree, based on their political/religious views, the only thing, so far as I can see, that this resolution actually says is that scientists should be able to move to another UN nation.

I suggest that you include a clause that requires certain sciences to be legal, and define it in a way so as to have protected science be something that most UN nations can support in good conscience.

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
I wouldn't bullet the list, just comma it into the sentence.

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,
Good.

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,
The? Also, "such process" doesn't make much sense to me.

DEFINES 'scientific equipment' as any equipment used to aid in scientific research,
Define 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,
Good. Put all of the definitions into one DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution: and then letter them a., b., c., etc.

HEREBY
Get rid of that word, it doesn't make sense and makes the proposal hard to read. Or, just say:

THEREFORE, the United Nations hereby...


STRONGLY ENCOURAGES governments to streamline procedures for the exporting of home-grown scientific endeavours, however ensuring that whatever entity exports the home-grown scientific endeavour has the right to so under international and national law;
I don't understand the second part of the sentence.

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;
Don't use SUPPORTS. Try ESTABLISHES or DECLARES.

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;
Replace the bolded section with "immediate family".

ENCOURAGES governments to loosen restrictions placed on scientific research by:
a. Removing or loosening of restrictions on where scientific research can take place, excluding basic health and safety requirements for the people who may be affected, as well as the environment in which the research is taking place;
b. Removing or loosening of restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substantial safety issues involved;
c. Re-evaluating restrictions on materials used during scientific research and removing or loosening restrictions on as many materials as is safe to do so;
ENCOURAGES is too weak. [STRONGLY?] URGES is better.

Overall, I must agree that this proposal needs something actionable to increase scientific freedom. Good start, though.

Personally I think this resolution is just the thing needed. It's not as rigid as some of the other proposals and really allows for individual countries to decide what responsible scientific research includes. It's too hard of a subject to nail down otherwise as everyone has a very different line to draw on the subject and I do feel nations should have some say in what scientific freedom means to their culture. I think something loose such as this is the only way to get a resolution on the subject through that will please the majority. Really if a certain country has too many restrictions than leaving for another is a good option and will not really impede the overall result to the world.

Edited to take into account Ceorana's suggestions
Added definition of scientist to ensure that only scientists that deal honestly with people involved with the research are covered in this proposal.

What is the Scientific Method?

What is the Scientific Method?

This (http://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/phy_labs/AppendixE/AppendixE.html)

I don't think I need to define this in the proposal

On the contrary, I think it is vital that you do so. Otherwise everything and anything can be called science, and what's the point then?

I've changed "Scientific Method" to "standard scientific practices" otherwise this proposal would get too definition heavy.

Then don't define "home-grown scientific endeavour". I see no point in that.

The scientific method is the whole key to what science is. Leaving that out for other, non-essential stuff is silly. Then it's just a resolution which states that people can leave the country if they disagree with the government.

Then don't define "home-grown scientific endeavour". I see no point in that.

The scientific method is the whole key to what science is. Leaving that out for other, non-essential stuff is silly. Then it's just a resolution which states that people can leave the country if they disagree with the government.

The whole point of defining that was to encompass all the potential results of scientific research though particularily excluding all weapon-related and destructive items. If you can provide me a word that I can use that I don't need to define I would be happy to use it.

5. STRONGLY URGES governments to loosen restrictions placed on scientific research by:
a. Removing or loosening of restrictions on where scientific research can take place, excluding basic health and safety requirements for the people researching, as well as obvious environmental concerns,
b. Removing or loosening of restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substantial safety issues involved,
c. Re-evaluating restrictions on materials used during scientific research and removing or loosening restrictions on as many materials as it is safe to do so.

I would really like this resolution to have some sort of binding measure to increase scientific freedom within a nation. I would propose something like the following (also move it up to the top):

1. MANDATES that governments take the following steps to facilitate scientific research:
a. ensure that there are adequate facilities or opportunities to build facilities for conducting scientific research that are safe, environmentally clean, legal, and economically viable,
b. ensure that obtaining adequate scientific equipment is not prohibited or excessively hampered by government regulations, excluding circumstances where there are specific and substantial safety issues involved,
c. re-evaluate restrictions on materials used during scientific research and remove or loosen restrictions on as many materials as it is safe to do so.

I'm not sure if that's too extreme, but otherwise all your proposal does is let people move around and urge governments to do stuff.

Scientific Method does not need to be defined. You could argue this procedure is RL otherwise I suppose but that's going a little far. Kind of like arguing the English language is RL. It's a known term with a definition readily known. Defining it here is a waste of space imo.

1. MANDATES that governments take the following steps to facilitate scientific research:
a. ensure that there are adequate facilities or opportunities to build facilities for conducting scientific research that are safe, environmentally clean, legal, and economically viable,
b. ensure that obtaining adequate scientific equipment is not prohibited or excessively hampered by government regulations, excluding circumstances where there are specific and substantial safety issues involved,
c. re-evaluate restrictions on materials used during scientific research and remove or loosen restrictions on as many materials as it is safe to do so.

I would not object to that change. At minimum all this really says is...

a) Scientists need to be able to make facilities (with out without real support/funding). They just need the opportunity.
b) Scientists need to be able obtain safe equipment.
c) Mandates nothing really... That you see if you want to remove or loosen restrictions on what you determine to be safe.

All reasonable requests toward scientific freedom while still giving nations a fair bit of discretion in the process.

Ausserland cannot support this proposal as written. We believe it will do little to actually promote the freedom of science, since only one of its operative clauses mandates action. And to this clause we object strongly:

4. MANDATES that any scientist wishing to conduct research in an area of research that is illegal in their home nation may relocate (as well as their immeadiate family) to another UN Member nation that does not have bans on such scientific research;

To "relocate" affects two nations: the original place of residence and the new one. As written, this clause would require us to allow anyone to enter our nation who fit the description. Not only would we be required to admit the scientist, but also his entire immediate family. Control of entry into a nation is and must remain the prerogative of that nation.

Hurlbot Barfanger
Ambassador to the United Nations

I agree, once again, with all those who say that this resolution does not go far enough. I support the basic text of it, but as it stands there remains no actionable clause worth legislating. For us to have a resolution that is worthwhile in any sense of the word, it needs to do more than guarantee freedom to move. Sovereignty only extends so far, and in this case it may be overruled by the United Nations for the betterment of humanity.

To support the resolution in its current form does not make sense, because the current resolution does nothing but suggest that nations promote science, without requiring them to. The only thing that this resolution actually mandates is that states may not set themselves up as isolationist-- and at that, only insofar as scientists are concerned. It has little bearing on science.

Therefore, I submit that this resolution, so written, is not worth the United Nations' consideration. It is not a bad proposal, but it requires more actionable clauses to make it one which Gurguvungunit will support.

To "relocate" affects two nations: the original place of residence and the new one. As written, this clause would require us to allow anyone to enter our nation who fit the description. Not only would we be required to admit the scientist, but also his entire immediate family. Control of entry into a nation is and must remain the prerogative of that nation.

Hurlbot Barfanger
Ambassador to the United Nations

True enough. I thank Ausserland for bringing this to the UN's attention. I hadn't really read it in that perspective. It can be easily fixed with a simple rewrite stating that the new nation can refuse entry based on their own immigration policies. I would strongly recommend to Bazalonia that they modify that clause.

We have considered and accepted Ceorona's suggestions and have edited what was clause 4 (now clause 5) to deal with concerns raised by Ausserland

We would like to recognise Ceorana's contribution to this proposal and thank you for your suggestions. I have added "Co-authored by: Ceorana" to the proposal. Thank you

Firstly, very well done; I was hoping that a replacement for Resolution #2 of this caliber would eventually be composed. Secondly, there is but one clause IMO, that this proposal lacks -- a major declaration providing scientists with what you say here:

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

My suggested edit (bolded):

The United Nations General Assembly hereby,

1. LEGALIZES in all UN Member nations the ability to research legal scientific topics without unneccessary infringements on said research or the results of said research,

2. MANDATES that governments take the following steps to further facilitate scientific research:
a. ensure that there are adequate facilities or opportunities to build facilities for conducting scientific research that are safe, environmentally clean, legal, and economically viable,
b. ensure that obtaining adequate scientific equipment is not prohibited or excessively hampered by government regulations, excluding circumstances where there are specific and substantial safety issues involved,
c. Reevaluate restrictions on materials used during scientific research and remove or loosen restrictions on as many materials as it is safe to do so.

As in clause c., its "Reevaluate" and "Reiterate", no hyphen.

3. RE-ITERATES governmental rights to regulate or prohibit distribution of explosives or other dangerous materials, such as radioactive isotopes;

4. RE-ITERATES governmental rights to determine whether certain areas of research are legal or illegal;
I would combine these into one clause, and put at the end.

5. MANDATES that any scientist wishing to conduct research in an area of research that is illegal in their home nation may relocate (as well as their immeadiate family) to another UN Member nation that does not have bans on such scientific research and is willing to accept them and their family;
Immediate is spelled wrong, and grammar dictates that "them and their family" be changed to "their family and them". (nitpicky, but still)

OOC: I agree with Jey that you can lose the hyphens. If you do adopt Jey's other suggestions, be careful about mixing US/UK spellings. If you're RECOGNISING then make sure you're LEGALISING not LEGALIZING, or vice versa. I don't personally mind which version you choose but I advise that you be consistent. Sorry if you're already aware of all this and don't need me to point it out.

I think Commustan is onto something with regards to making this Human Rights rather than Free Trade, though I'd still support a Free Trade resolution.

I appreciate that it may be frustrating having all this nitpicking, but this has the potential to be an excellent resolution and it's worth making sure it's spot-on.

taken into account jey's suggestions
edited grammar and spelling

While clause 3 is a clause that promotes free trade the vast majority of the proposal deals with Human Rights and the removal of restrictions on scientific research as such the category has been changed to Human Rights.

Please Note: I welcome all constructive criticism, no matter how nit-picky it may be.

Clauses 1 and 5 contradict each other, I would recommend dropping clause 5, but add into clause 1 an exception if a nation has a severe moral or safety issue.

Also, clause 4 doesn't seem to have any relevance to the resolution. I would drop it.

And I still think you should combine the definitions, but that's your call.

Clause 4 is relevant because many experiments require hazardous materials, such as radioactive isotopes. Clause 1 makes sure that, as long as the field of research is legal in the member nation, it is protected by the United Nations as well.

It is for the most part a well-written and generally good resolution and has Caratia's support.

A. T. Stilgram
Caratian Ambassador to the United Nations

Clause 1 legalises Scientific research into any legal 'area of research' it does not legalise all areas of research

Hmm.. yes clause 4 is superflous (It is covered under 2c) EDIT ... nah it's back in again

thank you for changing the category to human rights. I just have one question, though. Will this prohibit a future resolution banning human experimentation?

thank you for changing the category to human rights. I just have one question, though. Will this prohibit a future resolution banning human experimentation?

No this would not, if the UN decided to make Human experimentation illegal or any other item that would be defined as an 'area of research'. Clause 1 only deals with Legal areas of research and so it is compatible with a proposal to ban Human experimentation.

And Clause 5 is a statement recognising national sovereignty but does nothing to make other UN Proposals, in relation to 'areas of research', illegal.

Looks pretty ready to me.

Looks pretty ready to me.

Does anyone have anything else to add to thiis discussion? Any Suggestions, concerns, queries or questions?

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

DEFINES 'scientific research' as one or more experiments carried out under the methodology of the Scientific Method to gain data and test a hypothesis,

DEFINES 'scientific equipment' as any equipment used to aid 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,

DEFINES 'scientist' as any person performing scientific research in an honest and straightforward manner with both the government as well as any person taking part in the scientific research
For these to have any force, they should be operative clauses. I suggest you format it as such:

1. DEFINES:

- 'blah' as blah blah blah
- 'blah blah' as blah blah blah-blah
- and so on

1. LEGALISES in all UN Member nations the ability to perform scientific research in relation to areas of research that are legal without unnecessary infringements on scientific research or the home-grown scientific endeavours resultant from such research;
"Legalises...the ability" strikes me as odd. Doesn't the "that are legal" line make this a clause saying "everything that is legal is now officially legal"?

a. ensure that there are adequate facilities or opportunities to build facilities for conducting scientific research that are safe, environmentally clean, legal, and economically viable,
Don't like this. If scientists want to research, they can pay for it. Funding should be nothing more than encouraged.

5. REITERATES governmental rights to determine whether certain areas of research are legal or illegal;
This needs to be "legal within their sovereign territory".

*Placed the Defines as one single operative clause
*Changed ex-clause 1(now clause 2) to be one where nations are encouraged to promote research into any legal area of research without placing undue restrictions on the research or any resultant items
*Re-worded ex-clause 2a (now 3a)
*added "in their sovereign territory" to ex-clause 5(now clause 6)

"for the purpose of this resolution" should be moved up to after "defines", so it applies to all of the definitions:

DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution:
- blah
- blahblah
- etc.

I support this resolution.

This seems to be pretty much all the comments you're going to get on Jolt. I would recommend submitting for a dry run (submit w/o telegrams) or post on some offsite forums: Reclamation (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Reclamation) would probably like to take a look at this, although it's not terribly active.

Okay, submitted it for a dry run.

How do you get a nice handy link to the proposal using the search proposal box?

Use this link:
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_proposal1/match=

After the last '=', type one unique word from your proposal, like "freedom" (if another proposal comes in with "freedom" in the title, you'll have to change it, perhaps using %20 for spaces. So:

http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_proposal1/match=freedom

best of luck guys :)

Start a "SUBMITTED: Freedom for Scientific Research" thread, wait till we do it properly, or just use this one?

Approved of course.

I've tentatively approved this.

Don't be surprised if the endorsement disappears though. I won't have removed it, the delegacy is see-sawing between a few of us in the region at the moment.

Okay this didn't go through on the Dry run... Still had 50 or so endoursements to receive... but if we do a TG Campaign and start a new "SUBMITTED: Freedom of Scientific Research" Thread. Then we should get a quorom.

So could everyone who wants to help me on this TG campaign please TG me and then we'll organise a way to split up the Regional delegates... this includes anyone who has already shown interest or said they would be in the TG campaign.

Thanks

I'm not able to help with TGs but I wish you the best of luck.

I really think this leaves too many loopholes open, as well as being principally against the idea that someone who does scientific research the government doesn't like should relocate, because a government may decide whatever they want about what kind of research is legal and illegal. It preserves the status quo which is likely to harm scientific research in general.

My main issue is that is doesn't say what the scientific method is. That is so basic to science that it should be defined here, or else this resolution isn't really concerned with science, whatever the title says.

I really think this leaves too many loopholes open, as well as being principally against the idea that someone who does scientific research the government doesn't like should relocate, because a government may decide whatever they want about what kind of research is legal and illegal. It preserves the status quo which is likely to harm scientific research in general.

My main issue is that is doesn't say what the scientific method is. That is so basic to science that it should be defined here, or else this resolution isn't really concerned with science, whatever the title says.

How do you want to handle this? Things in one culture may be acceptible, maybe even demanded while the same thing in a different culture is immoral. Do you want to establish a Scientific Code of Ethics? or mandate certain situations where scientific research is allowed no matter what the culture of the population as a whole is?

With this proposal if the government makes restrictions going further than the culture of the nature then the scientist is free to take his/her whole immediate family to another country where they are.l This says the government can only make laws restrictions on science that are culturally acceptible/revelant and if they go too far scientists will leave. That is a given.

As for the Scientific Method concern, I'm assuming there is a generally accepted meaning for it in NS just as there is in RL. So I don't need to define it in the proposal because it is already defined else where. If you want to get a mod ruling on this then be my guest