NationStates Jolt Archive

Since I don't have that much to lose I took my chances and submited my second proposal, the pornographic control law. It can be found on the fourth page of the proposal list.

NOTE : This is based on an actual UN resolution proposal, which was debated about two years ago. As you may have noticed , it was not applied in the real world. I hope it will at least generate strong debate.


The pornographic content control law

Description : As we all know, pornographic content, transmitted on the Internet or by other means , affects the minds of many youngsters giving them a deformed perception on sexual activities, encouraging deviations and malformed opinions on partners of the opposite sex.

Although there are many legislation materials which reglement the direct sell or distribution of pornographic materials to minors, these laws are not enough to suffice.

The next set of laws could help control this ever increasing flagel :

1.Any Internet web-site which contains explicit pornographic material of any nature should have the global identifier which marks the information space changed from "www" to "xxx". This will help firewall and censorship programs completely block such addresses, and protect the feeble minds of youngsters.

2.Educational, clean movies, should be supplied thorough special services, which will not be obliged to follow the first article of the law if they can provide proof that the content they promote is completely safe.

3.No public television should be able to provide explicit pornographic material, under any circumstance or with any content warning. This will discourage any public person or institution, to push the limits of common sense.

4.The legal ages on which pornographic material can be acquired or viewed depend on each country's government and shall not be changed, as long as the conditions and terms of the distribution follows the above laws.

5.Any explicit pornographic material present in any form of entertainment (video games, books) will not be allowed unless the whole material is strictly dedicated to the promotion of pornographic images or descriptions, case in which it should fall into the jurisdiction of pornographic control laws.

6.Since many have already fallen under the influence of fetishist or sick pornographic materials, each state should allocate an infimous amount of money to special psychological clinics to help normalize the individuals perception on normal sexual activities.

7.National televisions should be obliged to broadcast educational material at accessible hours. These materials should remain purely educational and warn about the dangers of sexual deviations.


This can apply regardless of the government system.The law will most certainly help in the education of unformed youngsters, and help reduce the huge amount of money the pornographic industry swallows every year.If this could mean bankruptcy for the pornographic industry, it wouldn't be a great loss.

partners of the opposite sex.
Way to blow away any support you might have had from the liberals.

Anyway, we prefer our proposal on pornography. Not especially because of any flaw within this one - we'll leave it to others to pick it over - but just because its ours.

~Rono Pyandran
Chief of Staff

Heh, and I was just about to drop this in the Silly Proposals thread...1.Any Internet web-site which contains explicit pornographic material of any nature should have the global identifier which marks the information space changed from "www" to "xxx". This will help firewall and censorship programs completely block such addresses, and protect the feeble minds of youngsters.This won't do anything to block sites based in territories outside the UN, making it terribly ineffective.2.Educational, clean movies, should be supplied thorough special services, which will not be obliged to follow the first article of the law if they can provide proof that the content they promote is completely safe.This is waaaaaaaaay to vague in my opinion. Who determins what is "completely safe"? What's stopping me from producing an 'educational' movie on the joys of anal intercourse?3.No public television should be able to provide explicit pornographic material, under any circumstance or with any content warning. This will discourage any public person or institution, to push the limits of common sense.You're on a slippery slope here, I'm sure there's some form of freedom of speech in the current UN resolutions that would block this.4.The legal ages on which pornographic material can be acquired or viewed depend on each country's government and shall not be changed, as long as the conditions and terms of the distribution follows the above laws.Nothing wrong with this...5.Any explicit pornographic material present in any form of entertainment (video games, books) will not be allowed unless the whole material is strictly dedicated to the promotion of pornographic images or descriptions, case in which it should fall into the jurisdiction of pornographic control laws.See my point at #3.6.Since many have already fallen under the influence of fetishist or sick pornographic materials, each state should allocate an infimous amount of money to special psychological clinics to help normalize the individuals perception on normal sexual activities.Infamous? Infinite? :confused: Who determines what's normal? Would you allow anything outside Hunter Thompson's infamous "quick dutiful hump in the missionary position"?7.National televisions should be obliged to broadcast educational material at accessible hours. These materials should remain purely educational and warn about the dangers of sexual deviations.Ehrm... What are accessible hours? How much broadcasting time should be devoted to this "educational material"? Which "sexual deviations" should be preached against?

What you're so zealously trying to stamp out here has been around since 7200 B.C., if not longer (google Adonis von Zschernitz if you're not afraid to educate yourself...).

1.Several pre-ancient and ancient cultures divined human body shape. Ancient Greeks even considered the male body to be "perfect". This is why many statues feature small reproductive organs. It was considered to be an imperfection to the muscular body. I don't know if this has any relevance, but neither did the statues reference.

2.Ahh...the good old "outside the UN community". This one has a simple solution : UN ISP's can be obliged to ban any outside pornographical content.

3.The "clean" content specifically refers tot non-explicit sexual content (non-explicit in any way). This means that if I feature two covered people in bed, in a movie, it will not fall under the circumscription of the law.

4.Freedom of speech has it's limitations. If explicit pornographical material will be considered dangerous and confined by law to this status, the freedom of speech law will not apply.

5.Infimuos such as in "minimal" .This might be a regional expression and I have not taken this into account when elaborating the law. This "minimal" budget expense should be judged by every country.

6."Accesible hours" = "Hours of medium audience". Anal intercourse and oral one are under the sign of "sexual deviations".(although most of you might not know that, this is how it has been aknowledged). The "educational material" should be standardized on a UN level.

This can apply regardless of the government system.The law will most certainly help in the education of unformed youngsters, and help reduce the huge amount of money the pornographic industry swallows every year.If this could mean bankruptcy for the pornographic industry, it wouldn't be a great loss.Yes but a tax paying profiting porn industry helps keep many government officials paid well. Also little perks that make what would be a very boring dull political life a little more bearable are reason many great men seek to give up a dull mundane life and get into politics.

Thus why should anyone want to ban an industry that pays it's taxes...? Like all the rest do...

The industry pays taxes by corrupting minds. (This is not about freedom of choice, since most porn addicts have been drawn here by extensive advertising).

How about the a Human Meat Industry, for the cannibal population ? Wouldn't that pay taxes ?

As we all know, pornographic content, transmitted on the Internet or by other means , affects the minds of many youngsters giving them a deformed perception on sexual activities, encouraging deviations and malformed opinions on partners of the opposite sex.

As pointed out above, this fails to take into account homosexuality. Apart from which, of course, it is utter tripe. Please, show me some respectable research that demonstrates a causal link between pornography and psychological dysfunctions. And provide some argument to support your implied condemnation of "deviant" sexual behaviours - if both participants are adult and consenting, what's wrong with it?

Although there are many legislation materials which reglement the direct sell or distribution of pornographic materials to minors, these laws are not enough to suffice.

Why not?

1.Any Internet web-site which contains explicit pornographic material of any nature should have the global identifier which marks the information space changed from "www" to "xxx". This will help firewall and censorship programs completely block such addresses, and protect the feeble minds of youngsters.

Unenforcable. And it makes it far too easy for oppressive governments to block such materials altogether (OOC: imagine how much China's government would love a scheme that unambiguously marked any page discussing democracy or civil liberties).

Plus, I take issue with your labelling the minds of youngsters as "feeble".

3.No public television should be able to provide explicit pornographic material, under any circumstance or with any content warning. This will discourage any public person or institution, to push the limits of common sense.

"Common sense"? Really? Well, this kind of reasoning is hardly "common" amongst the people of _Myopia_ at least. Our publically-funded broadcasting services will not have their content restricted like this. They select materials on the basis of quality and public demand.

5.Any explicit pornographic material present in any form of entertainment (video games, books) will not be allowed unless the whole material is strictly dedicated to the promotion of pornographic images or descriptions, case in which it should fall into the jurisdiction of pornographic control laws.

This "all-or-nothing" is absurd. In a stroke, you have disregarded the artistic value that sexuality can have in the context of works which are not entirely pornographic, and to no apparent end either. Sexuality is an intrinsic part of human life, and many artists trying to explore humanity will find the depth and quality of their work impoverished by these restrictions.

6.Since many have already fallen under the influence of fetishist or sick pornographic materials, each state should allocate an infimous amount of money to special psychological clinics to help normalize the individuals perception on normal sexual activities.

"Infimous"? What's that when it's at home? Regardless, we will not waste our limited resources for the healthcare system trying to break harmless fetishes.

"Sorry Timmy, we can't afford to supply your antiretrovirals anymore, because we have to persuade Mr Simmons that having a woman shave his feet is bad."

7.National televisions should be obliged to broadcast educational material at accessible hours. These materials should remain purely educational and warn about the dangers of sexual deviations.

What dangers? That if they start enjoying sex, there won't be as much time left to pray? Educational efforts on sex would be better spent explaining how minimise the risks of disease and injury.

The law will most certainly help in the education of unformed youngsters

Define "help". If you mean "brainwash them into fearing experimentation with their bodies, potentially leading to issues of self-hatred and fear of intimacy in later life", then yep, you got it.

and help reduce the huge amount of money the pornographic industry swallows every year

Why is this more of a problem than any other industry swallowing large amounts of money?

If this could mean bankruptcy for the pornographic industry, it wouldn't be a great loss.

No, no great loss. Only billions of jobs globally and a good source of tax revenue.

5.Infimuos such as in "minimal" .This might be a regional expression and I have not taken this into account when elaborating the law. This "minimal" budget expense should be judged by every country.
If you want it to be a minimal budget then just say minimal as I'm sure that most of the people who are going to be seeing your proposal have never heard of that word. Hell dictonary.com hasn't even heard of "Infimuos."

Timothy Schmidt
UN Rep (pro-tem)/Bob Flibble's PA

First of all, glad to see you taking the advice of Cluichistan. Secondly, good to see you are not put off by the UN regular in here, we can be a nasty bunch at times. Myself included. Don't take it personally.

Now it's for my take on the situation. I'll go through the specific issues one by one, and then I'll go through a few less general issues as well.

As we all know, pornographic content, transmitted on the Internet or by other means , affects the minds of many youngsters giving them a deformed perception on sexual activities, encouraging deviations and malformed opinions on partners of the opposite sex.

Although there are many legislation materials which reglement the direct sell or distribution of pornographic materials to minors, these laws are not enough to suffice.Define malformed, define deviations. This legislation is overlooking same sex partners (on partners of the opposite sex).1.Any Internet web-site which contains explicit pornographic material of any nature should have the global identifier which marks the information space changed from "www" to "xxx". This will help firewall and censorship programs completely block such addresses, and protect the feeble minds of youngsters.Define explicit, define feeble. Problem with this is that websites outside of the UN are not going to be regulated by this, and will be able to disregard this legislation. Thus, not all websites will have the domain proposed.
No public television should be able to provide explicit pornographic material, under any circumstance or with any content warning. This will discourage any public person or institution, to push the limits of common sense.Similar issue here.
The legal ages on which pornographic material can be acquired or viewed depend on each country's government and shall not be changed, as long as the conditions and terms of the distribution follows the above laws.How is it possible to view when it is not available on TV? Sure there is other media.
5.Any explicit pornographic material present in any form of entertainment (video games, books) will not be allowed unless the whole material is strictly dedicated to the promotion of pornographic images or descriptions, case in which it should fall into the jurisdiction of pornographic control laws.I happen to think that gratuitous presentation of sex is pretty poor taste. However, pretending that sex is not part of life is foolish. Since entertainment normally reflects life, taking away one part of that reflection cheapens the entertainment. If you take away sex from entertainment, a source of education is removed. Yes, I know you make provision for wholly educational material, but I'm not too old to remember how awful and useless that material was when I was in school. People learn more from soaps and entertainment than they do from sterile educational videos starring Troy McClure.6.Since many have already fallen under the influence of fetishist or sick pornographic materials, each state should allocate an infimous amount of money to special psychological clinics to help normalize the individuals perception on normal sexual activities.Define Normal, define sick.
If this could mean bankruptcy for the pornographic industry, it wouldn't be a great loss.In your nation maybe, not the case in others.
7.National televisions should be obliged to broadcast educational material at accessible hours. These materials should remain purely educational and warn about the dangers of sexual deviations.Define deviations.

This is based on an actual UN resolution proposal, which was debated about two years ago.Could you please point us in the direction of this proposal? Everything the UN has ever done has been child pornography (at least, that is what a search of un.org and google revealed), with very few mentions of pornography not preceeded by the word "child"

Onto the overall problems.

It's clear this draft exposes your bias on this matter. This also exposes your lack of understanding on the matter. I don't think you've provided any compelling reasons to think this is a good idea, and I don't think you've provided any compelling ideas to resolve anything. You've demonstrated a lack of awareness by failing to recognise same sex relationships as well as mixed sex relationships. You've tried to take a 19th century outlook to a 21st century problem.

It's still rhetoric, and I do not think it is based on an actual (IE real) UN proposal like you claim.

Hirota will not be supporting a proposal submitted in it's present form, or supporting any proposal taking a similar stance.

How about the a Human Meat Industry, for the cannibal population ? Wouldn't that pay taxes ?

Indeed it does. Of course, in _Myopia_, this is partially offset by the costs of setting up voluntary registration and extensive hygiene inspection systems, but it still brings in a little income.

The industry pays taxes by corrupting minds. (This is not about freedom of choice, since most porn addicts have been drawn here by extensive advertising).

How about the a Human Meat Industry, for the cannibal population ? Wouldn't that pay taxes ?

Any industry that pays taxes and follows the regulations set on it by the government is legal here. Fail or refuse to pay taxes and we deal with that problem.. break the laws such as in the case of a cannibal killing somebody for his noon snack,, we try them for murder unless they have followed the rules on getting their snack. Any industry can be regulated by government and if those laws are enforced then you most of time have no problems.

As far as education of youngsters that is a two part deal as the parents have their part and then the schools have their part. Failure of either opens the door to problems...

First of all, glad to see you taking the advice of Cluichistan.

I'm frankly shocked. Nobody ever takes my advice. :p

I'm frankly shocked. Nobody ever takes my advice. :pI did shudder as I typed that :D

The pornographic content control lawOH, this ought to be good.:rolleyes:

Description : As we all know, pornographic content, transmitted on the Internet or by other means , affects the minds of many youngsters giving them a deformed perception on sexual activities, encouraging deviations and malformed opinions on partners of the opposite sex."Encourageing deviations," who the hell are you to say what's deviant?

Although there are many legislation materials which reglement the direct sell or distribution of pornographic materials to minors, these laws are not enough to suffice.They've worked just fine so far.

The next set of laws could help control this ever increasing flagel :"Flagel?" What language is that from because my dictionary doesn't have that word?

1.Any Internet web-site which contains explicit pornographic material of any nature should have the global identifier which marks the information space changed from "www" to "xxx". This will help firewall and censorship programs completely block such addresses, and protect the feeble minds of youngsters.No, it would only help if said website is based in a UN member nation.

2.Educational, clean movies, should be supplied thorough special services, which will not be obliged to follow the first article of the law if they can provide proof that the content they promote is completely safe.I can't even follow this clause.

3.No public television should be able to provide explicit pornographic material, under any circumstance or with any content warning. This will discourage any public person or institution, to push the limits of common sense.And just why does this need to be done by the UN, can't local government do it?

4.The legal ages on which pornographic material can be acquired or viewed depend on each country's government and shall not be changed, as long as the conditions and terms of the distribution follows the above laws.You know, this is actually the first clause that I haven't had a problem with.

5.Any explicit pornographic material present in any form of entertainment (video games, books) will not be allowed unless the whole material is strictly dedicated to the promotion of pornographic images or descriptions, case in which it should fall into the jurisdiction of pornographic control laws.Well, so much for art books containing pictures of any painting of nude people.

6.Since many have already fallen under the influence of fetishist or sick pornographic materials, each state should allocate an infimous amount of money to special psychological clinics to help normalize the individuals perception on normal sexual activities.While I'll admit that there are some pornography niches that I find sick (tubgirl comes to mind), why should we tell people that what they like to see in porn is wrong? Just because I have a thing for Japanese schoolgirls doesn't make me some sick pervert who needs therapy.

7.National televisions should be obliged to broadcast educational material at accessible hours. These materials should remain purely educational and warn about the dangers of sexual deviations.You know, I read your earlier comment about what constitutes "sexual deviations," and you've pretty much killed your own proposals chances of passing.

This can apply regardless of the government system.The law will most certainly help in the education of unformed youngsters, and help reduce the huge amount of money the pornographic industry swallows every year.If this could mean bankruptcy for the pornographic industry, it wouldn't be a great loss.
Unless you work in the pornography industry.

Timothy Schmidt
UN Rep. (pro-tem)/Bob Flibble's PA

1.Several pre-ancient and ancient cultures divined human body shape. Ancient Greeks even considered the male body to be "perfect". This is why many statues feature small reproductive organs. It was considered to be an imperfection to the muscular body. I don't know if this has any relevance, but neither did the statues reference.

2.Ahh...the good old "outside the UN community". This one has a simple solution : UN ISP's can be obliged to ban any outside pornographical content.

3.The "clean" content specifically refers tot non-explicit sexual content (non-explicit in any way). This means that if I feature two covered people in bed, in a movie, it will not fall under the circumscription of the law.

4.Freedom of speech has it's limitations. If explicit pornographical material will be considered dangerous and confined by law to this status, the freedom of speech law will not apply.

5.Infimuos such as in "minimal" .This might be a regional expression and I have not taken this into account when elaborating the law. This "minimal" budget expense should be judged by every country.

6."Accesible hours" = "Hours of medium audience". Anal intercourse and oral one are under the sign of "sexual deviations".(although most of you might not know that, this is how it has been aknowledged). The "educational material" should be standardized on a UN level.

Not part of the UN. So while I frankly don't care what you do, this seems to me to be nothing but an elaborate ploy in order to repress homosexual feelings.

1.Video tapes , DVD's and other portable media storage devices can be used as a substitute for television. Although some countries might not afford any expensive media means, some of them are accesible.

2.Sorry for the language. I might have used a few recently integrated expressions which have not been extended to a full scale, thus, making them unacceptable in general English.

3.Please stop trying to combate these arguments with claims such as "My country is the best...we don't do that..etc". Of course, every country will find a resolution they dislike, and everyone can debate endlessly using such arguments as "My people are the smartest in the world. They even tie their own shoe-laces".

4.I might have not elaborated this law cleverly enough since I did leave a few (a few more) bits of uncovered ground. It will not pass, most likely, but at least I've got some reasonable feedback.

5.I did not intend to make any discriminatory claims regarding homosexuals. The first phrase contained this line "pornographic material of any nature". However, being straight , I've formed some language (written or not) clichees regarding these issues. Should have checked it twice before applying. And yes, this include gay pornography.

Here I was, excited about a UN resolution which was actually itself pornographic. I was all hyped up for a sexually explicit preamble and hot clause-on-clause action. And instead it's a load of moralistic tripe. You have left me emotionally bereft and sorely disappointed.

I learnt my lesson the first time :)

Firstly, "hot clause-on-clause action"? Ha!

Secondly, "Our publically-funded broadcasting services will not have their content restricted like this" -- national sovereignty, from the _Myopian_ contingent? Double ha!

Lastly, the Destructor (ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Manuelo_Fernanda#Fernanda_vs._Thorne) would absolutely murder me if I offered any support whatsoever to a proposal limiting adults' access to porn. (But not kiddie porn. 'Cause that's just plain sick.)

We cannot offer our support for this legislation.

Alex Tehrani
Secretary of State

Who said anything about limiting adults access to porn ? Legal aged citizens have access to porn, however this access will be restricted to available materials, direct access through mass-media being forbidden.

1.Video tapes , DVD's and other portable media storage devices can be used as a substitute for television. Although some countries might not afford any expensive media means, some of them are accesible.

2.Sorry for the language. I might have used a few recently integrated expressions which have not been extended to a full scale, thus, making them unacceptable in general English.

3.Please stop trying to combate these arguments with claims such as "My country is the best...we don't do that..etc". Of course, every country will find a resolution they dislike, and everyone can debate endlessly using such arguments as "My people are the smartest in the world. They even tie their own shoe-laces".

4.I might have not elaborated this law cleverly enough since I did leave a few (a few more) bits of uncovered ground. It will not pass, most likely, but at least I've got some reasonable feedback.

5.I did not intend to make any discriminatory claims regarding homosexuals. The first phrase contained this line "pornographic material of any nature". However, being straight , I've formed some language (written or not) clichees regarding these issues. Should have checked it twice before applying. And yes, this include gay pornography.

Hey, I was talking about your definition of 'deviation'

The State of Amestria declares this proposed resolution redundant, vague, badly written, and poorly thought out. National Governments under this resolution would still be the foremost authority in the regulation of pornographic material and media standards. In addition the resolution fails to take into account differing national cultural standards and attempt’s to impose a one size fits all regulation system without any regards for State sovereignty. Furthermore, the resolution fails to provide any evidence that pornography is indeed as socially harmful as is claimed in the text, thus the resolutions core justifications are nothing more then worthless platitudes.

The Honorable Jean-Marc de la Sabliere,
The State of Amestria’s United Nations Ambassador

The industry pays taxes by corrupting minds. (This is not about freedom of choice, since most porn addicts have been drawn here by extensive advertising).

How about the a Human Meat Industry, for the cannibal population ? Wouldn't that pay taxes ?


I don't know about anyone else, but I've never seen advertising for pornography. Also, people who looking at nudie mags or watch pornographic movies aren't necessarily addicts, they just enjoy looking at or watching pornography on occasion.

And back to a few other posts, who the hell decides what is 'normal'? Everyone has a different opinion on what is considered normal.

A lot of countries (including Norderia) are very relaxed about the naked body, and sex. If it makes you uncomfortable, restrict it in your country. Not the entire UN.

<Insert similar grunting about definitions of the words sick, deviant, normal, etc>

We don't leave our children to be educated by TV or the internet. We've got damn good schools to do that. If they internet porn corrupts their minds, then one either has to have an especially dumb kid, or an especially lax definition of "corrupts."

Yeah, I know everybody's already thrown their two cents in, but I want join in the fun too.

Since I don't have that much to lose I took my chances and submited my second proposal, the pornographic control law. It can be found on the fourth page of the proposal list.

NOTE : This is based on an actual UN resolution proposal, which was debated about two years ago. As you may have noticed , it was not applied in the real world. I hope it will at least generate strong debate.


We try to oblige.

The pornographic content control law

Description : As we all know, pornographic content, transmitted on the Internet or by other means , affects the minds of many youngsters

I don't know that we all know that. It could potentially, I suppose, but such is not necessarily the case.

giving them a deformed perception on sexual activities, encouraging deviations and malformed opinions on partners of the opposite sex.

I'll skip the opposite sex thing. It's been covered. However, once again, pornography need not necessarily portray anything deviant, malformed, deformed, half-formed, cuneiformed, or whatever, nor will a child's perception of what they see necessarily be adversely affected. That being said, don't let your kids watch porn and the whole issue is avoided.

Although there are many legislation materials which reglement the direct sell or distribution of pornographic materials to minors, these laws are not enough to suffice.

Regulate. I'm honestly not sure what reglement is, but it sounds french. If these laws are not sufficient, how can we be sure that this one will be.

The next set of laws could help control this ever increasing flagel :

I googled flagel. It tells me that a flagel is a flat bagel. I have no clue what word you intended to use, but "problem" would have have done the job.

1.Any Internet web-site which contains explicit pornographic material of any nature should have the global identifier which marks the information space changed from "www" to "xxx". This will help firewall and censorship programs completely block such addresses, and protect the feeble minds of youngsters.

The non-UN nation issue has already been mentioned. On another note, not all youngsters are "feeble-minded". I think I understand that you are referring to the fact that their intellects are still developing, but the choice of words is not the greatest.

2.Educational, clean movies, should be supplied thorough special services, which will not be obliged to follow the first article of the law if they can provide proof that the content they promote is completely safe.

Who gets to define what safe is?

3.No public television should be able to provide explicit pornographic material, under any circumstance or with any content warning. This will discourage any public person or institution, to push the limits of common sense.

As this refers to only public television, I don't have an issue with this.

4.The legal ages on which pornographic material can be acquired or viewed depend on each country's government and shall not be changed, as long as the conditions and terms of the distribution follows the above laws.

Sure.

5.Any explicit pornographic material present in any form of entertainment (video games, books) will not be allowed unless the whole material is strictly dedicated to the promotion of pornographic images or descriptions, case in which it should fall into the jurisdiction of pornographic control laws.

So if there's any porn, it all must be porn. That's just odd. It completely disallows any form of simple erotica.

6.Since many have already fallen under the influence of fetishist or sick pornographic materials, each state should allocate an infimous amount of money to special psychological clinics to help normalize the individuals perception on normal sexual activities.

I googled infimuos. The internet denies it's existence as a word. Here's another area where I have to ask: Who get to decide what qualifies as sick or fetishist? And why are they qualified to choose?

7.National televisions should be obliged to broadcast educational material at accessible hours. These materials should remain purely educational and warn about the dangers of sexual deviations.

Why?

This can apply regardless of the government system.The law will most certainly help in the education of unformed youngsters, and help reduce the huge amount of money the pornographic industry swallows every year.If this could mean bankruptcy for the pornographic industry, it wouldn't be a great loss.


The best benefit to uninformed youngster as it regard to sex would involve parents actually taking responsibility for such things and taking a part in their children's lives. This isn't really UN attention worthy. That's just my two cents for the moment.

1.About flagel - it comes from Latin. I'm sorry for the expression. It initially refered to the moving tail of inferior organisms called flagelates. This tail is microscopical, such are the organisms. In some Latin derived languages the expression went on symbolising an idea, or notion that spreads quickly and uncounsciously. (going unnoticed , like the biological equivalent)

2.Deviation - A disambiguation note could be attached to clearly define "deviation", but this might not be the case, since the resolution will most likely fail to pass.

3.Although few of you agreed to my legislation, I can't quite comprehend the necessity of posts such as : My country will vote, etc..etc. As I've claimed on a previous post, there will always be a resolution that a country will not like, this is why the voting system has been invented. Arguments such as "My people don't watch porn" are biased and not viable. Why not heighten the discussion to a general level ? You may see something wrong with the legislation (and this one had quite a few flaws, as pointed), you try to demolish it with solid, unbiased arguments.

A lot of countries (including Norderia) are very relaxed about the naked body, and sex. If it makes you uncomfortable, restrict it in your country. Not the entire UN.

NatSov? ;)

Who said anything about limiting adults access to porn ? Legal aged citizens have access to porn, however this access will be restricted to available materials, direct access through mass-media being forbidden.

That makes no sense. If direct access through mass media is forbidden, then it wouldn't be very accessable, now would it?

That makes no sense. If direct access through mass media is forbidden, then it wouldn't be very accessable, now would it?

It makes sense. If you are of legal age you can obtain pornographic material, although not as easy as you could without the regulation.

P.S : Although this won't pass, I've come to think of a way to modify it in favour of a larger mass of people. However, I think I'll keep this to myself for the moment, since the proposal list has been flooded with pornographic ban \ restriction laws, in the last few days.

Adressed to the UN and its member states:

Juli 16th, 2006 - Jurion

Although not a member of the UN, the governement of Eurime strongly rejects this resolution and any resolution that attempts to limit, regulate or outlaw an individuals rights. We also ask that the the members of the UN nations recognise a complete freedom concerning sexual activities between consenting individuals as well as the absolute freedom of press including erotic, sexual or pornographic materials between consenting individuals. Eurime strongly condems any resolution that denies these rights.

Vincent Yvain
Secretary of External Affairs

Sunita Saundra
Secretary of Justice & Human Rights

the huge amount of money the pornographic industry swallows every year.This is just a delicious choice of words.

The rest is a moralistic miasma of muddled musings.

Who has the right to decide what I can and cannot see on the internet? Who has the right to decide where and when I can see it? Nobody. The only forms of pornogrphy I would legislate against is child porn, because it requires using children and promotes pedophelia, and rape porn, because it promotes rape. Absolutely and vehemently opposed in all ways to this proposal.

I agree with Dancing...

6.Since many have already fallen under the influence of fetishist or sick pornographic materials, each state should allocate an infimous amount of money to special psychological clinics to help normalize the individuals perception on normal sexual activities.
People who look or watch pornography aren't necessarily addicted to it.

I think people are allowed to watch whatever they want. If you have an age block... well kids going to find out when they're older anyways. Or they'll just find a way to get excess into the site.

7.National televisions should be obliged to broadcast educational material at accessible hours. These materials should remain purely educational and warn about the dangers of sexual deviations.
Then everyone might as well just watch Disney channel or Nickelodeon.

Did you know that - A female ferret will die if it goes into heat and cannot find a mate. haha.... I just thought that this would be an interesting fact of the day.

DBL: Do something about your sig, will you? Use tags for your link, not [html]

[url]s11.invisionfree.com/aberdeen/index.php?showtopic=740

This entire proposal is steeped with moralistic wording which seems to us to rest on very shaky and subjective ground. Not to mention ambiguous.


3.No public television should be able to provide explicit pornographic material, under any circumstance or with any content warning. This will discourage any public person or institution, to push the limits of common sense.

I see no reason to impose a ban on what television channels in each sovereign nation can broadcast.


5.Any explicit pornographic material present in any form of entertainment (video games, books) will not be allowed unless the whole material is strictly dedicated to the promotion of pornographic images or descriptions, case in which it should fall into the jurisdiction of pornographic control laws.


Much too broad. This is badly thought-out, and I really can't see the justification for it.


Christelle Zyryanov
Ambassador to the United Nations
PDSRA

DBL: Do something about your sig, will you? Use tags for your link, not [html]

[url]s11.invisionfree.com/aberdeen/index.php?showtopic=740Agreed. Edited.

And, for what it's worth, that link is useless to anybody who's not a registered member of those forums.

I don't know about anyone else, but I've never seen advertising for pornography.

Then the esteemed Karmicarian representative should visit Cluichstan. Our largest corporation, Cluichstani Private Entertainment Services Ltd. (http://s11.invisionfree.com/Antarctic_Oasis/index.php?showtopic=21), advertises extensively throughout the country (as well as in many other nations) and lists among its services pay-per-view pornographic television programs and the distribution of pornographic videos through the post and the Internet, as well as publishing a number of different magazine titles (indeed, there's pretty much one for nearly every sexual proclivity, barring those that are illegal in Cluichstan, such as pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophilia).

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

Then the esteemed Karmicarian representative should visit Cluichstan. Our largest corporation, Cluichstani Private Entertainment Services Ltd. (http://s11.invisionfree.com/Antarctic_Oasis/index.php?showtopic=21), advertises extensively throughout the country (as well as in many other nations) and lists among its services pay-per-view pornographic television programs and the distribution of pornographic videos through the post and the Internet, as well as publishing a number of different magazine titles (indeed, there's pretty much one for nearly every sexual proclivity, barring those that are illegal in Cluichstan, such as pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophilia).

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

Okay, so I have seen advertising. I completely forgot about CPESL. Sorry.

Okay, so I have seen advertising. I completely forgot about CPESL. Sorry.

OOC: Don't let it happen again. ;)

OOC: Don't let it happen again. ;)

OOC: It won't happen again. Sorry. Besides, your stuff isn't pornography.

Er, Karmicaria has its own little business like that, doesn't it? ;)

1.Any Internet web-site which contains explicit pornographic material of any nature should have the global identifier which marks the information space changed from "www" to "xxx". This will help firewall and censorship programs completely block such addresses, and protect the feeble minds of youngsters.


1. www is becomming obsolete, most sites are accessible with or without the leading "www", which leads to the second issue...

2. "www" is a DNS alias, not a namespace. "www" is redirected to the namespace of webserver in the domainspace, which more often than not (as noted in point 1) also responds to site requests from "domain.xxx".

Since I don't have that much to lose I took my chances and submited my second proposal, the pornographic control law. It can be found on the fourth page of the proposal list.

NOTE : This is based on an actual UN resolution proposal, which was debated about two years ago. As you may have noticed , it was not applied in the real world. I hope it will at least generate strong debate.


The pornographic content control law

[snip]

This can apply regardless of the government system.The law will most certainly help in the education of unformed youngsters, and help reduce the huge amount of money the pornographic industry swallows every year.If this could mean bankruptcy for the pornographic industry, it wouldn't be a great loss.l not be obliged to follow the first article of the law if they can provide proof that the content they promote is completely safe.


I do not consider this legislation of international importance, UN action is unjustified in this manner... Hell, this isn't even a matter of governmental importance at all from my POV, it's a parental issue.

I think the most unfortunate thing about this proposal is that sensible resolutions on pornography are now going to have a hard time overcoming the stigma of this one. I don't deny the author's intentions were decent (if misguided and unacceptably moralistic in the opinion of this ambassador), but the targeting of normal activity and deeming it unacceptable seems ludicrous, compared to the far worse issues such as child labour, war, poverty, space-junk and international phone numbers, that should be the focus of the U.N.

I would never deny the right of anyone to legislate on any issue and indeed with regards to pornography some areas do need to be legislated on. Child pornography, rape-pornography, violent, non-consensual pornography are all abominations which need to be combatted. But the cause of doing so will not be helped by moralistic rhapsodies like this proposal.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you all.

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

P.S. Incidentallly:

3.The "clean" content specifically refers tot non-explicit sexual content (non-explicit in any way). This means that if I feature two covered people in bed, in a movie, it will not fall under the circumscription of the law.

So if the bed-sheet was transparent, then it would be considered acceptable? No matter what they were doing under it?

Er, Karmicaria has its own little business like that, doesn't it? ;)

Pfft...that upstart wannabe? "Little" is right. :p

Er, Karmicaria has its own little business like that, doesn't it? ;)

Yes we do. Sort of.

Pfft...that upstart wannabe? "Little" is right. :p


:upyours:

:upyours:

OOC: I get that a lot. :p

OOC: I get that a lot. :p


OOC: Gee. I wonder why? ;)

OOC: Did your Cluichistani Private Entertainment Services let him down? That would piss most people off I reckon.

I'm just sad that all of the pictures are of girls. Can we get some provocatively posed men, too, Cluichstan?

I'm just sad that all of the pictures are of girls. Can we get some provocatively posed men, too, Cluichstan?

OOC: Not on this PG-13 site, no. :p

OOC: Did your Cluichistani Private Entertainment Services let him down? That would piss most people off I reckon.

OOC: CPESL never lets anyone down. :cool:

OOC: CPESL never lets anyone down. :cool:

Unless that's what the client actually wants? ;)

Unless that's what the client actually wants? ;)

Whatever the client wants, the client gets. ;)

OOC: That's a funny logical loop if you think about it. You want to be disappointed, so you get a disappointing service, but then aren't you satisfied because you've been disappointed and you wanted to be disappointed, but then you realise that in fact you're disappointed, so you can't be satisfied, but then you go back to the beginning and...

Oh you know what? What-ever!:)

OOC: That's a funny logical loop if you think about it. You want to be disappointed, so you get a disappointing service, but then aren't you satisfied because you've been disappointed and you wanted to be disappointed, but then you realise that in fact you're disappointed, so you can't be satisfied, but then you go back to the beginning and...

Oh you know what? What-ever!:)
OOC: Kind of like the sadist and the masochist getting it on. The masochist says, "Hit me!"; the sadist says, "No!".

Shut up, I laughed.

OOC: Kind of like the sadist and the masochist getting it on. The masochist says, "Hit me!"; the sadist says, "No!".

Shut up, I laughed.

:D

Could someone please close this thread, it has become a mere chat zone since the proposal has not been aproved anyway.

Are you intending to try and get this passed on a revision? If not, then I'll lock it.

ok... one major problem from what I can see is there is no definition of porn. This is a very broad range of things.
Are dating sites porn? They commonly have hot people on them.
What about ads for porn? If there is an ad for porn does the entire site need to follow those regulations?
What about if you have a person flashing somwhere on a big site?
What about image hosts where people can put up pictures for free what if one of there pictures is porn?
I would rather not ask many more questions because I would start to sound perverted, but I think you got the point. Give a definition of porn.

ok... one major problem from what I can see is there is no definition of porn. This is a very broad range of things.
Are dating sites porn? They commonly have hot people on them.
What about ads for porn? If there is an ad for porn does the entire site need to follow those regulations?
What about if you have a person flashing somwhere on a big site?
What about image hosts where people can put up pictures for free what if one of there pictures is porn?
I would rather not ask many more questions because I would start to sound perverted, but I think you got the point. Give a definition of porn.

Here is your definition:

The explicit depiction or exhibition
of sexual activity in literature, films
or photography that is intended to
stimulate erotic, rather than aesthetic
or emotional feelings.

Definetly not in for a revision, please close !

Description : As we all know, pornographic content, transmitted on the Internet or by other means , affects the minds of many youngsters giving them a deformed perception on sexual activities, encouraging deviations and malformed opinions on partners of the opposite sex.

Deformed perception? Don't you all make love like a porn star too? Am I doing something wrong?

Seems like the best way to well form an opinion is to get more experience in the matter, but how is this UN business?

Lets please stay out of the bedroom.



People can watch whatever they want.

Lets please stay out of the bedroom.



People can watch whatever they want.

My TV's in the living room, though... :p

Lets please stay out of the bedroom.

People can watch whatever they want.


And if what the people want to watch involves the rape, mulitaltion and murder of thousands of newborns via live satelite feed from the killing field direct to their home?

People can be sick, twisted individuals. Trust me, I am one of them..... There's few things that I enjoy more than seeing what movie makers and the like can come up with in an attempt to shock the sensibilities of those of us who are desensitized to brutality to a point where only the newest and most shocking expositions and exploitations can even begin to move us.

That said, there are limits. I, personally, find very little to be truly disturbing, but there are some things that are best left out of the lime light. Generally speaking, pornography, if well done, can be quite titilating and exciting. Unfortunately, such is not always the case.

Generally speaking, pornography, if well done, can be quite titilating and exciting

OOC: Putting the 'tit' in titilating, you could say.

OOC: Putting the 'tit' in titilating, you could say.


I'm not sure what's worse, that you noticed it, or that I didn't....:p

OOC: I'm English. It's in our national character never to pass up an opportunity for a pun, however risque. ;)

, personally, find very little to be truly disturbing, but there are some things that are best left out of the lime light.

I can't support that argument. It's too close to a censorship argument.

There are harmful images out there. But people will abuse the power to limit speach if you give them an inch.

We must handicap society, not letting it repress any speach, no matter how repulsive. It is a small sacrifice. Society can handle harmful ideas without censoring them :) That's what shame, stigma, and peer pressure are for.

OOC: I'm English. It's in our national character never to pass up an opportunity for a pun, however risque. ;)

OOC: You cheeky little monkey :p

OOC: You cheeky little monkey :p
OOC: Admit it, you're just ticked that Compadria beat you to it.

OOC: Admit it, you're just ticked that Compadria beat you to it.

OOC: Okay, a li'l, yeah... :)

There are harmful images out there. But people will abuse the power to limit speach if you give them an inch.Slippery slope nonsense. The fact that people are willing to actually make such arguments makes me pleased that the late President Carl Gibson unilaterally removed us from the UN years ago.

Most nations already have restrictions on so-called freedom of expression. There is the ever cliched example of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, but there are countless other examples, such as issue death threats. Most nations also have slander and libel laws (for better or for worse), to say nothing of laws against treason (comfort and aid can be verbal) and sedition.

Sedition laws are a popular whipping-boy for the insane anti-"censorship" crowd, but real sedition is something nations should be concerned about. I'm not talking about two drunk bubbas yammering about how much the government sucks, but about people seriously planning to overthrow a lawful government.

Most nations have some or all of these provisions and cannot (by a sane person) be said to be crushing civil rights. Just because one thing is banned or restricted does not mean that the next step is strapping on boots and goosestepping around the town square.

Please, ambassadors... try to think before you speak.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/UN/doctor.jpg
Doctor Denis Leary
Ambassador to the UN
The Federated Technocratic Oligarchy of the Most Glorious Hack

Slippery slope nonsense. The fact that people are willing to actually make such arguments makes me pleased that the late President Carl Gibson unilaterally removed us from the UN years ago.

Most nations already have restrictions on so-called freedom of expression. There is the ever cliched example of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, but there are countless other examples, such as issue death threats. Most nations also have slander and libel laws (for better or for worse), to say nothing of laws against treason (comfort and aid can be verbal) and sedition.

Sedition laws are a popular whipping-boy for the insane anti-"censorship" crowd, but real sedition is something nations should be concerned about. I'm not talking about two drunk bubbas yammering about how much the government sucks, but about people seriously planning to overthrow a lawful government.

Most nations have some or all of these provisions and cannot (by a sane person) be said to be crushing civil rights. Just because one thing is banned or restricted does not mean that the next step is strapping on boots and goosestepping around the town square.

Please, ambassadors... try to think before you speak.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/UN/doctor.jpg
Doctor Denis Leary
Ambassador to the UN
The Federated Technocratic Oligarchy of the Most Glorious Hack

You might be all for the continued erosion of the freedom of speach. I'll support doing so too, when absolutley necessary to prevent immediete loss of life. And then I'll apologize for it afterwards.

This thread has nothing to do with anything nearly that important.

Err, actually looking back at it now, I guess the author wants it shut down :)

I can't support that argument. It's too close to a censorship argument.

There are harmful images out there. But people will abuse the power to limit speach if you give them an inch.

We must handicap society, not letting it repress any speach, no matter how repulsive. It is a small sacrifice. Society can handle harmful ideas without censoring them :) That's what shame, stigma, and peer pressure are for.

I'm very supportive of freedom of speech, but in some areas you do have to balance individual rights with individual responsibility.

1). Libel and slander.

2). Racial hatred (as an aggravating factor, not necessarily as a sole offence).

3). Deliberately inciting violence against a group.

4). State secrets and confidential information.

Giving aid and comfort to the enemy is not one I particularly support, but you can understand the harmful nature of those sorts of expressions surely?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

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

In short terms : Please close the f***ing thread !

In short terms : Please close the f***ing thread !

The easiest way to get a thread closed is to post a thread requesting a closing in the Moderation forum. If you do so, though, I would suggest asking politely. ;)