NationStates Jolt Archive

This is a formal request for all Regional Delegates to approve the UN proposal: Repeal "The Sex Industry Worker Act", so that it may come up for vote.

Thank you.

This is a formal request for all Regional Delegates to approve the UN proposal: Repeal "The Sex Industry Worker Act", so that it may come up for vote.

Thank you.
It's considered polite to post the text of your proposal. Please do so in the future.

Repeal "The Sex Industry Worker Act"
Description: UN Resolution #91: The Sex Industry Worker Act (Category: Free Trade; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: COMMENDS Resolution #91's efforts to further individual rights.

NOTES that not all nations wish to legalize prostitution due to individual beliefs and cultural practices.

EMPHASIZES that a rise of numerous health risks and trends occur due to the legalization of prostitution, including but not limited to: the spread of diseases/STD's, crime increase, child abuse/molestation, rape, unwanted pregnancy/abortion, etc.

STATES that prostitution should be an institution decided upon by the individual nation as it so chooses.

REPEALS Resolution #91 due to reasons stated above.
One response you'll get to the "NOTES" line is that what nations 'wish' to do is largely irrelevant, given as you've already said, this is about individual rights, so I think that "COMMENDS" line shoots yourself in the foot.

The "EMPHASIZES" line will be the main bone of contention, given TSIWA was founded on the idea that legalized - and thus regulated - prostitution decreases such risks. Got any evidence to back up your claims?

Sorry, don't post in the forums very often, don't know the rules really well.

Sorry, don't post in the forums very often, don't know the rules really well.
Don't worry. And it's not a "rule", in the sense that you don't have to: as I say, it's simply generally considered good form, and makes it easier for delegates.

Sorry, don't post in the forums very often, don't know the rules really well.

Don't sweat it. It's not a rule. It's a custom, and you learn the customs by experience, just like you're doing.

As for the proposal, we have serious problems with the "EMPHASIZES" clause. We think some of it's questionable and other parts just plain wrong. The spread of STDs can be limited by a system where prostitution is legal and those involved are required to have health checks. We can't understand how legalizing prostitution would increase crime. And how would it promote child molestation or rape? It seems legalizing prostitution would give sexually driven individuals a means of legally satisfying their urges?

We appreciate your effort to contribute to the work of the NSUN. We couldn't support this proposal, though.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

speaking as a nation with a long history of legalized sex workers I can safely say that we have a lot less STD's with a legalised system in place that other nations who don't have.

As the Ambassador from Ausserland has already said a legal system stops child molestation or underage sex in the first place.

Ms Midori Kasigi-Nero
Deputy UN ambassador to the NSUN

Ariddia also highly doubts the veracity of the claims put forth in the 'EMPHASIZES' paragraph. We too believe the reverse to be true.


Christelle Zyryanov,
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

Ariddia also highly doubts the veracity of the claims put forth in the 'EMPHASIZES' paragraph. We too believe the reverse to be true.

We do not feel that all of the claims in that paragraph are true, but we do agree that prostitution has potential to increase disease in parts of the world. For that reason, we are willing to compromise and support this repeal.

Sithya likes the resolution as-is, as it respects the sovereignty of individual states to decide this question.

We will vote against repeal.

I apologize for the ambiguity and seemingly unreasonableness of some of the claims made in the EMPHASIZES paragraph. I would like to state though that the intention of the repeal is not to make prostitution illegal, but to give member UN nations the option to make it illegal should they so desire. And I do believe that if you agree with that that you should support it.

Sithya likes the resolution as-is, as it respects the sovereignty of individual states to decide this question.
Are you reading the same resolution? It rides completely roughshod over national sovereignty.

Are you reading the same resolution? It rides completely roughshod over national sovereignty.

Apologies, I mis-read it. We will vote for repeal.

I would like to rise in support of your repeal effort. There's no reason for the UN to show such total disrespect over national sovereignty in moral issues. I'm also a little sticky about the word "EMPHASIZES", but I'm not a big fan of legal prostitution myself, so you have my support. It's definitely a national issue, as it has nothing to do with basic human rights, fairness and equality or international relations. Good luck, but if this fails, you might want to take out "EMPHASIZES" and focus more on national rights and independence as the core of your argument.

Gruenberg Said:

The "EMPHASIZES" line will be the main bone of contention, given TSIWA was founded on the idea that legalized - and thus regulated - prostitution decreases such risks. Got any evidence to back up your claims?


That is exactly it, legalized and legislated prostitution invokes rules on disease control, the rights of the prostitute, etc...without legislation, it becomes illigal, but it still occurs. Occuring illigally there is no control, disease runs rampant, young children find themselves in the business, and pimps abuse their employees endlessly. I highly oppose this repeal.

Not only do I disagree with the alleged rationale (which I believe would be the case without a resolution legalising and regulating prostitution), but the idea of a repeal based on NatSov is ludicrous. NatSov isn't a reason, it's an opinion. If you want to write a repeal that we might contemplate voting for (which is highly unlikely), then I suggest you find another set of compelling reasons with good, solid backing.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

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

If you want to write a repeal that we might contemplate voting for (which is highly unlikely)...

Don't you think you're being a little harsh? I mean, for a first attempt, it wasn't that bad. In time, he'll probably get better.

Don't you think you're being a little harsh? I mean, for a first attempt, it wasn't that bad. In time, he'll probably get better.
I don't think Otterby meant the author wouldn't produce one: he meant he'd be unlikely to support any repeal of this resolution in any case.

Ah, just for the record, I'm a girl.

Edit:

And sorry about the clumsy first attempt, as you can see I'm pretty new at this. But If my repeal doesn't pass I'll try it again, as I really do believe that as sticky a topic as this is that it should be up to the nation to decide whether they want it or not.

Eternal Marching Band- relax, girl. I just submitted my own first proposals without even submitting them on the forums ahead of time. I had to withdraw "Rights of the Disabled" until more edits are made, largely because I wasn't thinking. We all learn!

Good luck with a decently edited version. I pretty much support national rights with this kind of stuff, so I've approved your current proposal despite my reservations, and I will gladly support other efforts to repeal this very disrespectful resolution.

I don't think Otterby meant the author wouldn't produce one: he meant he'd be unlikely to support any repeal of this resolution in any case.

If that was the case, then I apologize to Otterby for my assumption.

I think this "father knows best"-resolution is a blatant intrusion in people's civil rights. The choice to have sex for a living must be up to the citizen to decide for himself/herself - I don't see why it should be up to the citizen's elected representatives to make that call.

Fryk, do you sincerely believe that this is a significant free trade resolution, as it calls itself? Do you really believe that the right to pay for sex is so critical of a right that it transcends national boundaries and needs to be protected by international law? I don't.

Ah, just for the record, I'm a girl.

Edit:

And sorry about the clumsy first attempt, as you can see I'm pretty new at this. But If my repeal doesn't pass I'll try it again, as I really do believe that as sticky a topic as this is that it should be up to the nation to decide whether they want it or not.

No need for apologies. All of us were new at this once. You get applause from this delegation for having the good sense to post your draft here for comment.

Our objection to the repeal isn't because we disagree with your intent. We think there might be a good case for it. What we objected to was the fact that -- in our opinion -- some of the reasons in the "EMPHASIZES" clause were just plain wrong. We won't support a resolution that legitimizes bad information, even if we agree with its intent.

Please don't be discouraged. You just might come up with something we would support.

Patrick T. Olembe
Minister for Foreign Affairs

We would gladly support this resolution, as we believe in national soverignty on moral issues.

However, we believe that the EMPHASIZES paragraph lacks evidence and provides a biased view of legalized protitution. In Teufelanbetung, prostitution IS legalized but also regulated. Those who sell their bodies must, like any buisness selling a product, have a liscense. In order to obtain a liscense, they must be healthy and disease free to provide a safe enviornment for themselves and their clients. After obtaining a buisness liscense, they must submit a report every month on their physical well being. If they do not submit a report after two months, their buisness liscense is revoked. Anyone prostituting without a liscense is punished according to law. And if a person convinces a client (with a false liscense or words) that they have a liscense when they don't and subsequent damage follows (both of which a client must prove), a person illegally prostituting themselves may be civilally sued for damages caused, a type of malpractice suit as you will. We find that the legalization of prostitution and the subsequent regulation has in fact decreased STDs and abuses of sex workers. There's even support for people with a prostituting liscense in the form of sex workers unions and even allowed for those with liscenses to have a place of buisness and, in many cases, hired security personnel. Our experience with this issue has proved positive rather than negative. We don't believe the assumptions made in the EMPHASIZES paragraph are fair. The UN should not dictate moral matters, as this proposal believes. The EMPHASIZES paragraph is contradictory.

We will support this resolution as we respect the position other nations may have with prostitution, but we will not do so until the EMPHASIZES paragraph has been edited out of the proposal.


Azazel Diener
Leader of the Dominion of Teufelanbetung
Join the Region of Logic and Cooperation today! (http://www.nationstates.net/56576/page=display_region)

These are the core point of R91

1. DECLARES prostitution legal throughout the UN: any person who is mature ,and capable of making their own decisions may become a prosititute,We give a women the right to have an abortion so why not sale her body? Also making it legal says nothing about what restrictions may be place on those who work in this new industry.

2. EMPHASIZES that legalizing prostitution must coincide with regulation from the government, such as health and safety and other employment legislation, just like any other profession,As this clearly gives each nation a right to set the rules that they follow to work in the industry just like they would in any other industry. If they want to make them get medical exams every month and not be able to work in the industry if they have pink hair and yellow eyes because that is a sure sign of some medical problem then they can. So national government has not been excluded from this just now don't have to go looking for it in some back ally or car park in an empty lot or hotel. Where it goes on without any controls to promote healty safety issues.

3. RECOMMENDS nations that want to limit prostitution to tackle the issue by its roots and create education and social programs that will give more choice to people who might want to become a prostitute,Teach them to do something else and they will but some may not be able to engineer rockets and such so they turn to something they can do.. Thus here they get equal protection and heatlh care as any worker might. Take it to the back allies and cars and shady hotel rooms and they become a problem.

4. REQUESTS all nations to stimulate a clean and attractive working environment for prostitutes, and advises cooperation with the sex industry to renovate old "illegal" prostitution areas in towns and cities,As you would with any place a person might work..

5. CONDEMNS child abuse and slavery in accordance with earlier UN resolutions (End slavery, Child Labor, Outlaw Pedophilia, The Child Protection Act, Ban Trafficking in Persons, etc) and advises strong punishments against people involved with these despicable crimes that explicitly are not covered by legal prostitution.All this does is remind members that these have already been dealt with and should have no part in this industry since it has no part in any industry.


OOC: If you define postitution as paying for sex then what is marriage?

Do you really believe that the right to pay for sex is so critical of a right that it transcends national boundaries and needs to be protected by international law?

The right of every indivdual to have full control for one's body is a critical right, yes, and should be transcending national borders.

So how does this appeal work? What is the procedures and the policy to appeal and resolution.

I think perhaps something to go with is that nations with no history of legalised prostitution might have problems regulating it. Legalised prostitution is only safer/better where there is an actual ability to make it so.

I think perhaps something to go with is that nations with no history of legalised prostitution might have problems regulating it. Legalised prostitution is only safer/better where there is an actual ability to make it so.If a nation that don't have industry X can deal with forming regulations on industry X then is should have the resources to deal with this one. Also if a nation funding efforts to end it then maybe they need to take another look at that and convert funds to something that works better and may save lives rather than cost lives. This industry is said to be one of the oldest known to man thus it will be there no matter how much effort is placed to stop it. Marriage if you look at it is a form of legalized prostitution if you consider postitution as paying for sexual favors from a person. As somebody pays in a marriage and sexual acts are in turn performed thus natons regulate marriage so why can't they prostitution.

We do not feel that all of the claims in that paragraph are true, but we do agree that prostitution has potential to increase disease in parts of the world. For that reason, we are willing to compromise and support this repeal.

Prostitution will happen whether it is legal or not. Illegal prostitution presents a far greater health risk than legalised, controled, regulated prostitution.

Voting for this repeal with increase health risks, contrary to what it claims.


Christelle Zyryanov,
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

We'll support a repeal free from contentious claims. National sovereignty should do it, to be honest.

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

If that was the case, then I apologize to Otterby for my assumption.

No apology required, I wasn't offended in any way.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

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

P.S. Ecopoeia :eek:

P.S. Ecopoeia :eek:
OOC: Heh. We're not 'intfeds', never have been. We're just 'natsov' in a different way from the NSO and co.

Eco's position here is the same as my own - yeah, I think legalising prostitution may prove a good move, but I'm not certain about this and I think it's far from an essential right. In addition, the sad fact is that prostitution almost always - even in NS - works to the disadvantage of women. A hardcore anarchist who used to be in the ACA pretty much made it his one exception to the anarchist rule - he despised the whole business.

An argument from others in my region is that it's an innately capitalist transaction, too, which they don't like for obvious reasons.

We give a women the right to have an abortion so why not sale her body?We don't. We used to, but that was repealled. It seems hypocritical for member states to oppose bodily self-determination in some cases, but wholly endorse it in others.

I personally opposed this resolution when it first came out because it turns the exploitation of women into something which is supposedly ethical, because it is the state exploiting them. It's the state who becomes the pimp, the state who brings in taxes from women desperate enough to sell their bodies. Oh sure, some women might want to, but a lot less than some on here would like to believe/hope.

Regardless of how you put this, it's exploitation. This piece of crap is the reason why Hirota abolished income tax to ensure we are not among the group of nations who indulge in the exploitation of women.

We respect a womens right to choose and for bodily self-determination on all matters (including abortion), we oppose the state exploiting those desperate enough to make such a choice.

This industry is said to be one of the oldest known to man thus it will be there no matter how much effort is placed to stop it.

Isn't yours one of the nations whose people are a species other than 'man'? ;)

Isn't yours one of the nations whose people are a species other than 'man'? ;)
OOC: And ours - we're 'humanity' or 'humankind'.

I don't do Jolt emoticons, but imagine a huge winking face at this point.

I don't do Jolt emoticons, but imagine a huge winking face at this point.Aw... come on... first one's free...

This act already has my vote....

Aw... come on... first one's free...
I believe that may be a violation of the terms of the Net Industry Worker Act. There ain't no such thing as a free wink.

While the people of Cluichstan would normally support a repeal of a resolution, like this one, that tramples all over national sovereignty, certain corporate interests (http://s11.invisionfree.com/Antarctic_Oasis/index.php?showtopic=21) have lobbied us to fight a repeal of this particular resolution.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

We don't. We used to, but that was repealled. It seems hypocritical for member states to oppose bodily self-determination in some cases, but wholly endorse it in others.

I personally opposed this resolution when it first came out because it turns the exploitation of women into something which is supposedly ethical, because it is the state exploiting them. It's the state who becomes the pimp, the state who brings in taxes from women desperate enough to sell their bodies. Oh sure, some women might want to, but a lot less than some on here would like to believe/hope.

Regardless of how you put this, it's exploitation. This piece of crap is the reason why Hirota abolished income tax to ensure we are not among the group of nations who indulge in the exploitation of women.

We respect a womens right to choose and for bodily self-determination on all matters (including abortion), we oppose the state exploiting those desperate enough to make such a choice.Heh. There are maybe 1,000 different ways to rationalize inconsistency.

Heh. There are maybe 1,000 different ways to rationalize inconsistency.Rationalise implies there is some sort of logic to it. Justify is perhaps a better description.

No.

Next demand?

Prostitution will happen whether it is legal or not. Illegal prostitution presents a far greater health risk than legalised, controled, regulated prostitution.
If that regulation is adequately administered. In states with no experience of handling such requirements, your assertion is by no means guaranteed.

It seems hypocritical for member states to oppose bodily self-determination in some cases, but wholly endorse it in others.
That is the most comical statement I have ever seen.

Oh, and can you find something less obnoxious than "bodily self-determination" to go with?

That is the most comical statement I have ever seen.

Oh, and can you find something less obnoxious than "bodily self-determination" to go with?If you cannot say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

Have a nice day.

Isn't yours one of the nations whose people are a species other than 'man'? ;)Using the term lighly here to mean race, lifeform, whatever be it that might have two genders and one can be exploited in some way. As we find that many races of life have faced the same problems so when we say man we use the term lightly. As we have found that our female are as important a part of our survival as any man might be. All we need do is give them equal chance to show their worth as we would a male. Also we have three genders but will not get into the medical bioligical meanders on how each function with the other.

OOC: Consider an ant colony.. Male, Queen, Worker/Soldier

Nodlez[/COLOR]"]Also we have three genders[very ooc]Pasta has genders?

Sorry; couldn't resist. Carry on.

[very ooc]Pasta has genders?

Sorry; couldn't resist. Carry on.

OOC!

1. Macaroni is female.
2. Spaghetti is male.
3. I'm ashamed of myself for posting this.

:eek:

OOC!

1. Macaroni is female.
2. Spaghetti is male.
3. I'm ashamed of myself for posting this.

:eek:

Why? Because Macaroni has a hole and spagetti is just a straight stick?

Um.....

.....

Why? Because Macaroni has a hole and spagetti is just a straight stick?

Um.....

.....
Better option is conchiglie = female?

Pity poor fusilli...

Actually, all plural nouns ending in "i" in Italian are male. That's the masculine form. Those ending in "e" are feminine.

So...

Male:
Bucatini,`Cannelloni, Capelli di angelo, Cresti di gallo, Ditali/ ditalini, Fusilli, Gemelli, Linguini, Lumaconi, Macaroni, Rigatoni, Spaghetti, Tagliarini, Vermicelli

Female:
Cochiglie, Eliche, Farfalle, Fettuccine, Lasagne, Lumache, Orecchiette, Penne, Tagliatelle,

Hermaphrodite:
Anelli / aniline

I was thinking more of the shapes, you see... never mind.

So, a good repeal, eh? That'd be nice.

OOC: Leave it to the UN forum crowd to turn a repeal debate into a discussion on the gender of various pastas.

I love y'all.

OOC: Consider an ant colony.. Male, Queen, Worker/Soldier

Exactly, and we would like also to take the opportunity to say that nature/god (choose the one you prefer) didn't draw any defined border between male and female for the human species, once again there is a continuum between the 2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

Hermaphrodite:
Anelli / aniline

Hermaphroditic pasta -- now there's a disturbing thought. :D

HotRodia: "Leave it to the UN forum crowd to turn a repeal debate into a discussion on the gender of various pastas."

And leave it to me to make sure it continues.

We would like to know if the EMPHASIZES paragraph is going to be deleted out of the proposal.

Thank you.

Azazel Diener
Leader of Teufelanbetung
Join the Region of Logic and Cooperation today! (http://www.nationstates.net/19063/page=display_region)

Member Nations,

Without our knowledge, our good brothers have moved to Repeal this Resolution. The people of Anadar agree. Furthermore, as we were (until recently) unaware of this repeal, we also proposed a separate Repeal of this resolution with similar reasoning as well as additional points. (See page 6 of the proposals).

We urge, therefore, all UN delegates that sit in this vast council chamber to overturn Resolution #91.

Anadar

We would simply like to reiterate our opposition to any repeal of this resolution.

While the people of Cluichstan would normally support a repeal of a resolution, like this one, that tramples all over national sovereignty, certain corporate interests (http://s11.invisionfree.com/Antarctic_Oasis/index.php?showtopic=21) have lobbied us to fight a repeal of this particular resolution.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

The Federal Republic officially supports a repeal of this legislation, although the president did have a rather violent (and weeping) outburst before finally agreeing to our corporate sponsor's demands on this.

~Jack Riley
Ambassador to the United Nations

The Federal Republic officially supports a repeal of this legislation, although the president did have a rather violent (and weeping) outburst before finally agreeing to our corporate sponsor's demands on this.

~Jack Riley
Ambassador to the United Nations

Mr. Riley:

No more services for you. And you still owe us CEBC 30,000.

Cordially,
Sheik Eralc bin Cluich, CEO
Cluichstani Private Entertainment Services Ltd.

The Nation of Ginet wishes to point out that if prostitution is legal and regulated, it's easier to moniter health concerns and to prevent sex slavery.

Bah. Don't shoot the messenger, Sheik; especially not a messenger who represents a nation that will decide the fate of your own employers' delegate ambitions. Moreover, I don't set our corporate sponsors' policy. In fact, I'm certain the CPESL, as a respected *cough*cough* member of the OMGTKK business community, has more pull with President Fernanda's sponsors than I do.

Oh, and you're demanding your price in empty beer cans?! Ha! In our nation, 30,000's about the price of two value coupons to a Sav-On. [Tosses coupons at the sheik.]

[Scoffs.] Don't say I left you with nothing, Sheik.

I have not yet seen a valid NatSov argument against R#91. This is a repeal based on emotional/moral rections. No nation is forced to legalize prostitution -- rather, they are not allowed to forbid legalization. If the several nations do not wish to legalize, they don't have to. That seems to me to respect NatSov quite nicely.