NationStates Jolt Archive

COMMENDS UN Resolution #68 for acknowledging the issue of trafficking in persons,

APPALLED by the implication that only women are abused in this manner,

NOTICES the phrase "decriminalize the women in prostitution" which effectively legalises prostitution,

FURTHER NOTICES that a resolution which had the sole purpose of doing just that (Resolution #46: "Legalize Prostitution") was repealed,

ALSO NOTICES that the acts condemned by Resolution #68 are already punishable under Resolution #6: "End Slavery",

CONCERNED by the lack of definition for such words as 'pimps', 'procurers', and 'trafficking',

REPEALS Resolution #68: "Ban Trafficking in Persons".

EDIT: Fixed a bit. Thanks Karmicaria.
EDIT 2: Changed line 4 a bit. Better?
EDIT 3: Thanks again Karmicaria for fixing line 4.

Okay, you do have the start of something good here. If you don't mind, I'm going to suggest some rewording. I am only trying to help. Right then.

AGREES WITH the messages that Resolution #68 puts forward.

I suggest wording it like this: COMMENDS UN Resolution #68 for acknowledging the issue of trafficking in persons,

Or something along those lines.

HOWEVER IS SHOCKED at the implication that only women are put through this kind of abuse, and that only men put them through it.

For this one: APPALLED by the implication that only women are abused in this manner,

NOTICES the phrase "decriminalize the women in prostitution" which effectively legalises prostitution.

This argument will not work. To decriminalize: A system that punishes offenses by means other than prison.

To legalize: the process of removing a legal prohibition against something which is currently illegal.

In other words, if you decriminalize something, you will still be punished for committing the act, but not necessarily thrown in jail for it.

If the act is legal, you can preform it without fear of going to jail or being punished in some other way.

FURTHER NOTICES that a resolution which had the sole purpose of doing just that (Resolution #46: "Legalize Prostitution") was repealed.

This is irrelevant. The resolution in question has been repealed. Remove this argument.

ALSO NOTICES that Resolution #6: "End Slavery" already criminalizes the behaviors that Resolution #68 seeks to criminalize.

This could be reworded, but I'm not sure how just yet. I'll get back to it. That is, unless someone else beats me to it.

CRITISIZES the use of language such as "pimps, procurers and traffickers" without defining their meaning in relation to the resolution.

Rewording: CONCERNED by the lack of definition for such words as 'pimps', 'procurers', and 'trafficking',

REPEALS Resolution #68: "Ban Trafficking in Persons".

Obviously this is fine.

As another guy trying to give nations back their right to make up their own minds on prostitution, and as a person who agrees with your points about the fact that men are also victimized by trafficking, I support your efforts. I would recommend that you add a line encouraging a suitable replacement to prevent trafficking of all people. It would better the odds of passage, if only by being symbolic.

de‧crim‧i‧nal‧ize: to eliminate criminal penalties for or remove legal restrictions against
No reference to prison there, or on any of the other dictionary websites I checked.

EDIT: But yeah, I agree with you on everything else.

No reference to prison there, or on any of the other dictionary websites I checked.

EDIT: But yeah, I agree with you on everything else.

That was just my explanation of the the definition. There is still punishment for an act that has been decriminalized. However, that punishment may not necessarily be a jail sentence.

The reason I brought it up:
NOTICES the phrase "decriminalize the women in prostitution" which effectively legalises prostitution,

This does not effectively legalize prostitution. It decriminalizes it. Which means that you can still get busted for prostitution, but may not go to jail for it. Something that is decriminalized can still be a civil offence.

If prostitution is legal, then there is no civil or any other offense. Yay no jail or any other punishment.

There are two definitions for decriminalization. One is similar to legalization, the other is as Karmicaria put it. In such cases where law is taken very specifically, "decriminalization is the reduction or abolition of criminal penalties in relation to certain acts."

So really, I would offer that that definition is the one used in the NSUN Resolutions, since it gives that extra step between prohibition and legalization.

My interpretation of the phrase after rereading the resolution is that it does not intend to legalize prostitution, but what it does intend to do is make it so that if prostitution is illegal, the actual prostitutes shouldn't be the ones being punished. I think. It is very ambiguous.

I still think that line 4 should be completely removed. As I said, it's irrelevant. There is no point in citing a resolution that has been repealed. And citing a repeal is just silly. Next.

ALSO NOTICES that Resolution #6: "End Slavery" already punishes the behaviors that Resolution #68 conemns,

NOTING that the acts condemned by UN Resolution #68 "Ban Trafficking in Persons" are already punishable under UN Resolution # 6 "End Slavery",

If you would like some good, constructive criticism you should go to Reclamation. Just link to it through my sig.

There are people there that will be able to help you get this to where it should be.

I fully support this repeal. The resolutions I hate most are well intentioned ones that, through there level of poor quality, actually do the opposite of what they set out to do.