NationStates Jolt Archive

I'd just ike to say, before yu read this...I never saw myself jumping on the repeal bandwagon...but man, is this a bad resolution, and it seriously needs to be replaced. Fortuneately, unlike some other repeals, I don't think we'll see a "slavery legality convention" sanctioning slavery. This hasn't been submtted yet.


End Slavery
A Repeal


APPLAUDES the intentions of resolution #6, "End Slavery".

ACKNOWLEDGES slavery has no place in the twenty-first century.

HOWEVER fells that End Slavery is a poorly written resolution in that it:

1- Does not properly define slavery
2- legislates outside it's jurisdiction
3- fails to adequetly prevent slavery or the slave trade.

STRONGLY URGES the immediate replacement of "End Slavery" with a better written resolution to the same effect.

REPEALS UN resolution #6 "End Slavery"

*yawn*

Yah...I almost feel guilty doing this, but man End Slavery has to be repealed and replaced.

Origional resolution:

United Nations Resolution # 6

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

End slavery



A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Monocerous

Description: The scourge of slavery yet remains in these progressive times. People are bought and sold like cattle, unable to determine their destiny. Their families are split apart; they are allowed no possessions of their own. They are beaten, chained, and tortured.

Therefore, I propose that the following human rights be given to every peoples of this great world:

- The right to leave her or his job, given two weeks' notice.

- The right to own possessions.

- The right to travel freely throughout their country.

- The right to bodily safety from one's employer.

- The outlawing of the selling or purchasing of people.

Votes For: 6939

Votes Against: 1753

Implemented: Tue Jan 21 2003

I can't really see the point of repealing this, apart from the two weeks notice there's nothing you can really object to. I'd just let it lie really.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

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

Slavery wasn't addressed? Ok, make a new proposal outlawing slavery.

If it wasn't touched, it isn't duplication......

This is one of the very few resolutions in the first 10 that I'm perfectly fine with leaving on the books. Now, onto that dreaded #9.....

True, it isn't malignant, but I feel that it doesn't adequetly prevent slavery...and I don't know if I can write a resolution making up for #6s failings without hitting the "no amendments" rule. As for it not addressing slavery, it only says that a human cannot be purchased or sold. This could easily lead to loose definitions, bartering, giving slaves as gifts, and slaves can still be kept if they are not bought or sold. I don't really care about it being outside it's jurisdiction with some of it...I just thought that would get some of the "Resolutions must only do what they say they do" guys.

Anyway, if not a repeal, could anyone help me draft another resolution fixing this ones problems without violating the amendmants rule?

"No person, group, organization, corporation, or goat may own any human being."

- The right to own possessions.To me this Resolution says I can have slaves as a POSSESSION.. As long as I don't buy them then sell them... they can be given as gifts or traded for a horse or even a can of beans. As see nothing in R6 that says anything about owning anything except that we have a right to OWN POSSESSIONS and they are not defined so one can assume we have every right to OWN SLAVES.
- The outlawing of the selling or purchasing of people.As it clearly deals with the selling and purchasing of PEOPLE not giving and trading them....

Also some may not consider SLAVES and PEOPLE on equal terms as there is also nothing in R6 that defines what SLAVES are.. compared to PEOPLE. Thus in nations where PEOPLE become citizens and SLAVES who serve PEOPLE are not citizens... there is no violation in trading or giving of SLAVES just if you buy and sale PEOPLE.

Also notice this clearly only gives PEOPLES rights to leave a job with two weeks notice not SLAVES to leave anything.

"- The right to own possessions."

Hm. Even though this couldn't be used in a Repeal, someone could easily spin this as an ideological ban against pure communist and collectivist countries that have no sense of "personal property".

Hm. The more I look at this sucker, the more worthless it seems to me.

I'm not sure about the use of this point, Dancing Banaland: "1- does not meet current resolution format". I think including that, at least worded that way, is leaving yourself open to counter attack. I'm sure it'll met with such rebuttals as "Well, the current format wasn't in effect then - if we cancel this one because of format, we have to cancel all the resolutions pre-dating the current format".

After reading the original resolution, I believe I could solidly get behind a repeal, as the original very vague and poorly worded (it seems to deal too much with examples of rights lost to slavery, rather than a broad scope concept that can be applied to all facets of slavery). However, I did want to at least give my two cents on that element of the repeal's wording.

I'm not sure about the use of this point, Dancing Banaland: "1- does not meet current resolution format". I think including that, at least worded that way, is leaving yourself open to counter attack.More importantly, the format isn't mandated.

Look through these:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=466612
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=466980
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=468347
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=468345
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469202
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469200

Some good stuff, I think.

I agree #6 is useless, but I think a better approach might be to first pass a ban on slavery that's more comprehensive but doesn't run foul of duplication/contradiction, then repeal it.

Slavery is not to our taste. However, I recognise that the proposal in question leaves open loopholes.

It must be clear, though, that any replacement would not outlaw indentured servitude as a method of repaying debts and working off criminal punishments. Indentured servitude has a long history in some parts of Darsomir, and we see no reason why it should be banned.

Johannes
UN Representative for Her Holiness Aristhia.

Well, perhaps I'll fromove the formatting argument. Anyway, I'm drafting a replacement if this repeal goes through (I havn't submitted it yet), I should have it up today.

BANNING SLAVERY
A resolution

BELEIVING that slavery is a barbaric practice, and has no place in the 21st century.

BELEIVING that human beings are not property and cannot be owned.

DEFINING for the purposes of this resolution "hard labour" as significantly tiring or stressful labour in excess of three consecutive hours.

DEFINING slavery as the ownership and/or forced hard labour of a human being (excluding prisoners).

DEFINING the "slave trade" as the purchasing, selling, trading, bartering, or giving away of a human being.

DECLARING that no UN nation may allow slavery, the slave trade, or the transportation of slaves in their territory.

MANDATING that no UN nation may directly, intentionally or knowingly receive funding from, or fund slavery or slave trading within or outside their territory.

MANDATING that no UN nation may harbour slavers, slave traders or those that fund or profit from slavery or the slave trade, even if these practices should occur outside said nation's territory.

STRONGLY URGING UN nations to severe ties with slavery supporting non-UN nations.

STRONGLY URGING non-UN nations to halt the practice of slavery.


Ok, this is my replacement if this repeal goes through, and if not, can this be legally submitted with resolution #6 still in place?

OOC: I still think Article 8 of the ICPR is a very good starting point:

Article 8

1. No one shall be held in slavery; slavery and the slave-trade in all their forms shall be prohibited.
2. No one shall be held in servitude.
3.
1. No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour;
2. Paragraph 3(a) shall not be held to preclude, in countries where imprisonment with hard labour may be imposed as a punishment for a crime, the performance of hard labour in pursuance of a sentence to such punishment by a competent court;
3. For the purpose of this paragraph the term "forced or compulsory labour" shall not include:
1. Any work or service, not referred to in subparagraph (b), normally required of a person who is under detention in consequence of a lawful order of a court, or of a person during conditional release from such detention;
2. Any service of a military character and, in countries where conscientious objection is recognized, any national service required by law of conscientious objectors;
3. Any service exacted in cases of emergency or calamity threatening the life or well-being of the community;
4. Any work or service which forms part of normal civil obligations.

After reviewing the laws of Aringull, I believe that our system of voluntary indentured servitude could continue to function under either of those systems. I cannot, however, speak for the laws in other parts of Darsomir.

Johannes
UN Representative for Her Holiness Aristhia

you have to abolish slavery, it is simply diabolical..

Having seen the proposed replacement, I'm changing my views on the repeal. I think the replacement's a good start, if it could be implemented it'd be far more comprehensive and effective in combatting the evil that is slavery and the trade of those in bondage.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you all.

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

OOC: I still think Article 8 of the ICPR is a very good starting point:


Why is there no 3?

The "ICP" isn't in UN format, and everything in there is already in mine.

Anyway, any thoughts on the repeal, replacement, and if the replacement can be passed without a repeal beforehand (is it different enough?)

That, and you gotta admit, it's better thant this repeal:

Repeal "End slavery"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal

Resolution: #6

Proposed by: The State of Georgia

Description: UN Resolution #6: End slavery (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Acknowledging the intent to make the world a better place with this resolution.

However it greatly infringes upon a country's economic and judicial systems.

For instance, a Judge should be able to sentence a murderer to life in slavery instead of the death penalty so that the killer may give back something to the society he/she violated.

If the 'End Slavery' resolution is repealed I intend to propose another resolution detailing regulations such as 'companies may only have 20% of their workforce as slaves' (to prevent unfair competition).

Approvals: 23 (Child Care Workers, NewTexas, Muftwafa, Desert Storm Iraq, OmniMega Pharma-Corp, Dorksonia, Ketalis, Landstreicher, Phthisis, Ukubukustan, Arendias, Darth Mall, Ohrder, Hickling, Krankor, Quashqai, Para-Military Pirates, Futuristic America, Popinjay, Trious aliuos, Zadoran, The Scribe of Alphaks, Istarii)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 102 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Thu Apr 20 2006

I tried submitting it, then it said the title didn't work (guess because of the colon) then I backed, then the strength bar kept becoming a check mark, then I put in the title then accidently hit enter...but I hit stop on the browser, now the submit button is greyed out...WTF?

If you want to repeal, you have to find the End Slavery resolution and click on the link there. You can't repeal from the proposal submission page.

OOC: Dancing Bananland, ICPR is a real international legal convention. Of course it's in fucking proposal format: I just snipped one section of it. And you have certainly not included all the provisions of Article 8 in your proposal.

Besides, your chances of passing a repeal first are pretty poor.

ohhhhh, thats not good because I did submit it... does this mean I get a warning? Or will they accept it.

Anyway, onto the important part of the discussion, can I pass this resolution without repealing "End Slavery" or are they too much alike?

ohhhhh, thats not good because I did submit it... does this mean I get a warning? Or will they accept it.

Anyway, onto the important part of the discussion, can I pass this resolution without repealing "End Slavery" or are they too much alike?
I personally think "End Slavery" is sufficiently weak that, potentially, a second one could pass without a repeal, but that'd obviously be a call for the mods to make, and I doubt they would do so until you presented them with a draft.

Is an ammendment out of the question?


Errr, just as long as this doesn't have an effect on my current role as a sub to my dominating slave master. Ooo, have I strayed off topic?

*sips Gin, waits for a whippin'*

;)

SLAVERY IS WRONG!!!!!! WRONG I SAY!!! WRONG!!! KEEP IT AWAY FROM MY COUNTRY!!! okay, my civil rights and political freedoms are an *eensy weensy* bit down, but who cares? SLAVERY IS WRONG!!! BOYCOTT IT!!! NOW!!!

There is nothing wrong with slavery. There is nothing condemning it in the Bible. It should be allowed in certain and regulated circumstances.

There is nothing wrong with slavery. There is nothing condemning it in the Bible. It should be allowed in certain and regulated circumstances.


so its okay because it isn't condemned in the bible. Lots of stuff isn't condemned in the bible, doesn't make it okay. Besides, its not like the bible outright says slavery is a good thing either.

Please consider a statutes popularity before trying to repeal it. It is tiresome to vote on something which cannot pass. It may be a political statement.

Slavery in the bible is very different than what we consider slavery nowadays. First off in the old testament, every five years slaves had to be let go with a payment for their services unless they voluntarily chose to remain a servant. This is very different from the way we consider slavery. American slavery failed to follow biblical injunctions about slavery. Laws were pretty strict about how a slave could be treated in the old testament, it was much closer to being a bonded worker than our conception of absolute slavery. Still, it is unnecessary and costly in todays economies. Wage slavery-- minimum wage is cheaper.

"There's nothing condemning slavery in the bible". Treat those around you as you would like to be treated is also expressed in the bibble. Who gets to own Georgia's derrier? I've got me hands full

:fluffle:

There is nothing wrong with slavery. There is nothing condemning it in the Bible. It should be allowed in certain and regulated circumstances.

The Nation of Ginet, having only recently won it's freedom from slavery takes great offense to any Proposal that would legalize or encouraage it in any way. As for the above statement, the only response we will make is this:

:sniper: :mp5: :gundge:

OOC: Sorry about the gun smileys, but the Ginetians are touchy about the subject, and I couldn't resist. :)

SLAVERY IS WRONG!!!!!! WRONG I SAY!!! WRONG!!! KEEP IT AWAY FROM MY COUNTRY!!! okay, my civil rights and political freedoms are an *eensy weensy* bit down, but who cares? SLAVERY IS WRONG!!! BOYCOTT IT!!! NOW!!!
Calm down, even if this repeal passes it doesn't mean that slavery will be allowed in your nation, it just means that you can allow it.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Can I suggest you do some spell-checking on your repeal? It's got a few errors.

I still don't think the UN will vote to repeal what they view as a slavery ban, in favour of a replacement which hasn't been finished yet. Better to see the extent to which you can craft a new resolution without contradiction, and then repeal the old one.

There is nothing wrong with forcing convicts or people who have gone bankrupt/unable to pay debts into slave labor. As long as there are regulations to prevent corporations from having an all slave work force so that unfair competition is not harbored.

Can I suggest you do some spell-checking on your repeal? It's got a few errors.

I still don't think the UN will vote to repeal what they view as a slavery ban, in favour of a replacement which hasn't been finished yet. Better to see the extent to which you can craft a new resolution without contradiction, and then repeal the old one.

I agree with Gruen on this one. While the original resolution is toothless, I think if you show that you have a stronger resolution to replace it, you would have more support. It would definately be easier to get the fluffies on board, as some have a "reaction" to repeal without replacement. I'd even be willing to help you draft, or at least give some ideas, as Evil Conservative I may be...I abhor the slave trade. The Palentine Navy has orders from the Emperor, to attack and board any slave ship, and summerily execute the crews, and if the ship puts up a fight, to sink it.

A nation called 'Kiften' started drafting repeal & replacement proposals for 'End Slavery' a few months ago, but apparently has been too busy with other matters recently to continue the project. Looking at the threads about their work might provide some useful ideas.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=466612
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=466980
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=468345
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=468347
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469200
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469202

I already drafted a replacement a while ago.

BANNING SLAVERY
A resolution

BELEIVING that slavery is a barbaric practice, and has no place in the 21st century.

BELEIVING that human beings are not property and cannot be owned.

DEFINING for the purposes of this resolution "hard labour" as significantly tiring or stressful labour in excess of three consecutive hours.

DEFINING slavery as the ownership and/or forced hard labour of a human being (excluding prisoners).

DEFINING the "slave trade" as the purchasing, selling, trading, bartering, or giving away of a human being.

DECLARING that no UN nation may allow slavery, the slave trade, or the transportation of slaves in their territory.

MANDATING that no UN nation may directly, intentionally or knowingly receive funding from, or fund slavery or slave trading within or outside their territory.

MANDATING that no UN nation may harbour slavers, slave traders or those that fund or profit from slavery or the slave trade, even if these practices should occur outside said nation's territory.

STRONGLY URGING UN nations to severe ties with slavery supporting non-UN nations.

STRONGLY URGING non-UN nations to halt the practice of slavery.

This repeal is only one day away from the end of voting, please, add your support for this proposal and allow it to reach quorum, please. (It's on page 3 of the list of UN proposal submissions). We are still over 100 endorsements away.

Caratia applauds both the repeal and the replacement resolution. I pray that they reach quorum soon.

However, I would like to advise UN members that a mild form of what can be considered slavery (known also as indentured servitude) is active in certain regions of Caratia. It is legal under Caratian law, but is strictly regulated and the conditions and length of service are always agreed upon by both slave and master. I do hope that this will remain legal under the replacement proposal (I can see nothing in it that really bans indentured servitute), as it is a significant part of Caratia's history.

Perhaps this is a loophole, especially since there is no actual definition of slavery in the proposal.

A. T. Stilgram
Caratian Ambassador to the United Nations

well, slavery is ownership or forced labour. Indentured servitute is mearly work, except with a debt instead of payment.

Blast! Still 101 endorsements away from quorum and voting ends today!!!1

UN Delegates, please endorse my repeal of End Slavery!!!!

A repeal of "End Slavery" has about as much chance of success as a repeal of "Gay Rights."









Oh, wait a minute... :p

If it doesn't reach quorum, will you consider trying a "replacement" first?

Natch, I just seriously hope my replacement isn't too alike to "End Slavery"...