NationStates Jolt Archive

REPEAL Outlaw Necrophilia
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: TropicalMontana

Description: A RESOLUTION TO REPEAL "Outlaw Necrophilia"

ACKNOWLEDGING that necrophilia is viewed as despicable by many people;

NOTING that necrophilia does not usually take place on an international scale, and therefore does not fall within the purview of the UN;

REAFFIRMING that sovereign nations may outlaw necrophilia on a local level, where it is best identified and dealt with.

CONCERNED that the language of the original resolution proscribing "desecration" of a corpse could be construed to prohibit organ donation, scientific research, and some after-death rituals preferred by certain religions;

REPEALS "Outlaw Necrophilia", leaving each nation to set the law individually.




While there are several other proposals to repeal this legislation, none of them address the issue of organ donation, scientific research, or post-mortem religious rituals (i.e. pyres).

This proposal does not seek to legalize necrophilia or justify it in any way. Our concern is more about the unintended consequences of a vaguely defined international law.

I would appreciate your support.

Wow. That was quick.

Spare us. The resolution was mild, and its language was non-mandatory, meaning your nation does not have to do what it says if you don't want to. The rights of necrophiliacs have not been infringed upon at all. And since "desecration" is not defined in the article, your nation is free to define it any way it pleases. I really am sick of all these people who suddenly appear on this forum because they have a knee-jerked reaction to anything that says "Moral Decency" on it, and have the nerve to cry "national sovereignty!!" when: 1) the provisions in the resolution are not mandatory, leaving your sovereignty intact, and 2) these same people likely would be strangely silent about "sovereignty" if the question were a Human Rights or Social Justice resolution.

As to:

NOTING that necrophilia does not usually take place on an international scale, and therefore does not fall within the purview of the UN;It is not for you to tell the United Nations what is and what is not "within its purview." The majority of membership decides what the business of the UN is, on a case-by-case basis.

REAFFIRMING that sovereign nations may outlaw necrophilia on a local level, where it is best identified and dealt with.This sounds suspiciously like a new law, which repeals cannot do. And I already explained to you, the original resolution does not violate "sovereignty" at all.

CONCERNED that the language of the original resolution proscribing "desecration" of a corpse could be construed to prohibit organ donation, scientific research, and some after-death rituals preferred by certain religions;I really couldn't care less if certain nations want to shoot themselves in the foot and outlaw these things. The resolution contains no definition of desecration, so nations can define it as they see fit, and what's more, the resolution is not mandatory. It shouldn't be the UN's job to prevent against stupidity by member states.

Really, I had enough of this shit during the floor debate. This is enough. Please just drop it.

I vote against the repeal, simply because I'm tired of the whole subject. Bringing it up against is too much like beating a dead horse (is that still legal? ;) )

This repeal is illegal. You have it the human rights category. It should be in the REPEAL category.

And as OMGTKK said, we're sick of this crap. There is nothing that says you have to go by the resolution. Not a single mandating clause in it.

This repeal is illegal. You have it the human rights category. It should be in the REPEAL category.Heh. I didn't even notice that.

Not to mention that repeals based solely on Nat Sov arguments are also illegal. Whether "CONCERNED that the language of the original resolution proscribing 'desecration' of a corpse could be construed to prohibit organ donation, scientific research, and some after-death rituals preferred by certain religions" is enough to say this is not just a nat sov repeal is a matter for the mods to decide, but this looks like a nat sov repeal to me.

I looked for the Category of "Repeal" and did not see it. I only picked human rights because it seemed to come closest.

@OMGTKK - while i appreciate your comments, your venom is misplaced. You assume that my intentions derive from a problem with "morality" legislation, which they do not. My motivating factor is the desire to keep the UN simple and kept out of affairs that do not need to be put on a global scale. If you've had 'enough of this shit', please feel free to steer clear of this thread.

In order to repeal a resolution you have to go here. (http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=10)

Yeah, I know that I'm helping you. I'm not worried though. This is the fifth Repeal "Outlaw Necrophilia" to hit the list in as many days. It's cute.

Cute it may be, but it has a lot better argument than the lame repeals that went before.

@OMGTKK - while i appreciate your comments, your venom is misplaced. You assume that my intentions derive from a problem with "morality" legislation, which they do not. My motivating factor is the desire to keep the UN simple and kept out of affairs that do not need to be put on a global scale. If you've had 'enough of this shit', please feel free to steer clear of this thread.That does not take away from the fact that your repeal text is illegal and makes invalid arguments.

This is the fifth Repeal "Outlaw Nercophilia" to hit the list in as many days. It's cute.

"Nercophilia?":p

"Nercophilia?":p

I have no idea what you're talking about. Take another look. :p

In one sense the NS jolt forums is a lot like real government ... "I reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks at a later time." :p

Cute it may be, but it has a lot better argument than the lame repeals that went before.

Let's examine that, shall we...

Argument: ACKNOWLEDGING that necrophilia is viewed as despicable by many people;

Good, we're in agreement so far.

NOTING that necrophilia does not usually take place on an international scale, and therefore does not fall within the purview of the UN;

So now a single nation gets to dictate to the UN what falls within its purview? That's funny......

The UN has the power to legislate on any issue that we, as the member nations, grant it the power to legislate on.

REAFFIRMING that sovereign nations may outlaw necrophilia on a local level, where it is best identified and dealt with.

Why is it best done by locals? Is there some huge difference between our two nations that would render my necrophilia completely alien to your necrophiles?

CONCERNED that the language of the original resolution proscribing "desecration" of a corpse could be construed to prohibit organ donation, scientific research, and some after-death rituals preferred by certain religions;

Hey, somebody hasn't done any research. In the spirit of Sexual Freedom, look to the title of the resolution when in doubt. The desecration refers back to necrophilia. As for any concerns about organ donation or after death rituals, take note of the resolutions inclusion of "unauthorized". Common rituals for after death could be authorized.

REPEALS "Outlaw Necrophilia.

No, it really doesn't.

Meh, I don't really care about Outlaw Necrophelia one way or the other, I abstained, and repealing it would just use up more time that could be better spent on more important proposals.

Indifferently opposed.

Why do you want a repeal, Necophilia is basically rape since i doubt the person would like to have unconsenting sex especially when they are not awake.

Just to be clear, I want to repeal the resolution because the language is so vague it could have serious unintended consequences.

I am NOT for necrophilia. In TropicalMontana sexual acts with a corpse are illegal.

Just to be clear, I want to repeal the resolution because the language is so vague it could have serious unintended consequences.Then why don't you just recognize that the resolution is mild in force with no mandatory language, and move on? Any "serious unintended consequences" are no fault of the resolution, as it does not require anything.

Just to be clear, I want to repeal the resolution because the language is so vague it could have serious unintended consequences.

Could you please explain further on the "unintended consequences", you go into minor detail in your repeal, but not enough for me to argue.

I am NOT for necrophilia. In TropicalMontana sexual acts with a corpse are illegal.

If sexual acts with a corpse are already illegal in your nation, what are you so worried about? And please don't give me the national sovereignty argument. It's been done and it's getting old. In the debate for my resolution, I asked the other members of the National Sovereignty Organization to tell me if there was anything that infringed on a nation's sovereignty, and not one of them said anything, and trust me, they would.

Now, if you can come up with valid reasons, then maybe more will listen.

I wish you luck with this, but it seems to me, that it will be going the way of the dodo.

I want to repeal the resolution because the language is so vague it could have serious unintended consequences....such as?

...such as?

Such as silly, irritating repeal efforts apparently.