NationStates Jolt Archive

IC: (Which means IN CHARACTER {Which should be assumed by default for all posts})

Resolution:

The NSUN decalares that if 2 organisms have the same DNA, and age, they have the same legal rights.

IC: (Which means IN CHARACTER {Which should be assumed by default for all posts})

Resolution:

The NSUN decalares that if 2 organisms have the same DNA, and age, they have the same legal rights.

This would mean that a pair of monozygotic twins, where each live in a different country, would have exactly the same rights, whereas dizygotic twins might not necessarily.

Also, a cloned organism need not have the same age as the organism of which it is a clone.

The NSUN decalares that if 2 organisms have the same DNA, and age, they have the same legal rights.

It's a nineteen word resolution. Could you not at least spell all nineteen correctly?

*Ahem*
May I draw your attention to this (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7030146&postcount=57)?

Fascinating. Stupid but fascinating. The BioRights Declaration simply states that the "the inherent rights of cloned and genetically engineered persons as being the equal of those of naturally born and unmodified persons."

This resolution addresses the relations between multiple beings born or created at the same time (according to the term "age") among each other. It sort of invalidates the Spock fallicy.

Spock (to robotic clone #1): I like you.
Spock (to robotic clone #2): I do not like you.
Robotic clone #2: But I am identicial to Clone #1.
Spock (to robotic clone #2): That is why I do not like you, because you are identical.
Robotic clone #2: :eek: :eek: :eek:
Robotic clone #1: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Spock (to robotic clone #1): I like you.
Spock (to robotic clone #2): I do not like you.
Robotic clone #2: But I am identicial to Clone #1.
Spock (to robotic clone #2): That is why I do not like you, because you are identical.
Robotic clone #2: :eek: :eek: :eek:
Robotic clone #1: :eek: :eek: :eek:

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

What happends when the age of the clone is different?

What happends when the age of the clone is different?

If the suggestion was adopted as a resolution, then that situation would correspond to the organisms not being clones at all.

As pointed out, however, such a resolution would be redundant since the issue is covered in another resolution.

Actually this proposal is much further reaching than the BioRights Declaration if it is to be regarded as meaningfully distinct. If I'm reading it right, it is declaring identical twins and clones created at the same time as being legally the same person.

So either it's illegal, or it's very, very silly.

All things are created equal and under certain laws policies and other things have rights based on what they do once they pass the creation point. Any two humans or whatever created equal have rights based on where they live. It is how they act beyond the creation that let them keep or cause them to loose those rights. They, even twins and clones become individuals able to think for themselves and take actions that effect their rights. To say they have equal rights simply because they as equal to another person is taking away their individuality and thus effecting their rights to be an individual.

Are we to assume that if one clone of twelve is a serial killer they all will be thus treat all twelve equally... and hang them...

Judge Hangman,
Cavirra Court of Justice

This would mean that a pair of monozygotic twins, where each live in a different country, would have exactly the same rights, whereas dizygotic twins might not necessarily.

Also, a cloned organism need not have the same age as the organism of which it is a clone.

Of course. Do you see any problem with that?

Yes clones may be of different age. I did not want to assert that 2 organisms of different ages must have the same status. I wanted to deliberately avoid any debate of prenatal clones.

Actually this proposal is much further reaching than the BioRights Declaration if it is to be regarded as meaningfully distinct. If I'm reading it right, it is declaring identical twins and clones created at the same time as being legally the same person.

So either it's illegal, or it's very, very silly.

That is deliberate.

Perhaps I need an addendum, asserting that despite the above, one organism is not reponsible for its clones rights?

And defining "clone" to be any 2 organisms with the same DNA.

I think a good, legal, resolution can be 1 paragraph. I want to have as small a scope as possible, while guaranteeing my legal rights, as a clone.

The glorious nation of Tyler Cooper and its even more Glorious King, Tyler Cooper, hereby reject your resolution.

The glorious nation of Tyler Cooper does not accept human cloning as an acceptable medical practice.

As such, a bill giving rights to clones must be considered an endorsement of cloning in general.

Ergo, Tyler Cooper must reject your resolution.

This would mean that a pair of monozygotic twins, where each live in a different country, would have exactly the same rights, whereas dizygotic twins might not necessarily.Of course. Do you see any problem with that?

I most certainly do. It is discrimination between human beings based on genetic traits for which the individual cannot in any way be held responsible. As such I find that it cannot be accepted under any circumstances.

I most certainly do. It is discrimination between human beings based on genetic traits for which the individual cannot in any way be held responsible. As such I find that it cannot be accepted under any circumstances.

Huh? Let's start over. How can guaranteeing equal rights ever be construed as discrimination? After your prove that's possible we can get back to this particular attempt to guarantee my rights as a clone.

Your rights as a sentient being are already guaranteed under the BioRights Declaration, which has been pointed out repeatedly. What you seem to be asking for (and that's a pretty damn big hint that your lovely, succinct, comma abusing proposal is a tad ambiguous) is a declaration that two being with the same age and DNA are legally a single person. That's pretty demented, even for the UN.

Huh? Let's start over. How can guaranteeing equal rights ever be construed as discrimination? After your prove that's possible we can get back to this particular attempt to guarantee my rights as a clone.

I am amazed to see how my words are being twisted beyond recognition.

Granting equal rights to monozygotic twins is perfectly fine. Not granting the same rights to dizygotic twins is not; it is to grant unequal rights, which by definition is discriminating.

I am amazed to see how my words are being twisted beyond recognition.

Granting equal rights to monozygotic twins is perfectly fine. Not granting the same rights to dizygotic twins is not; it is to grant unequal rights, which by definition is discriminating.

Failing to grant rights is not discriminating. One batch of legislation does not have to guarantee every right, to every person.

Still, it appears my resolution isn't as necessary as I thought. Now I'll devote my efforts to the resolution threatening to ban my method of reproduction. As a sterile clone, I consider it discriminatory.

As such, a bill giving rights to clones must be considered an endorsement of cloning in general.

Ergo, Tyler Cooper must reject your resolution.


Then you need to leave the UN because they have endorsed the process of cloning already in a resolution... which has been in place for some time now. Also efforts some time back to ban or limited any form of cloning or simular process failed as under bio-rights they have the same rights as normals would to reproduce even if it's not in the normal manner but mixing things in a test tube. There have been several tries to ban cloning or limit the cloning process due to folks not knowing what it all about and fears of some genetic monster(s) being mass produced that will take over....

Human twins are the nearest thing to clones and some time back found an article said there were about 8 million of them around at anytime in the real world.

Then you need to leave the UN because they have endorsed the process of cloning already in a resolution... which has been in place for some time now. Also efforts some time back to ban or limited any form of cloning or simular process failed as under bio-rights they have the same rights as normals would to reproduce even if it's not in the normal manner but mixing things in a test tube.

While we concur entirely with your sentiment, we fear that the BioRights Declaration gives no such guarantee. Clones have the same rights as any non-cloned person, but whether or not that includes being cloned is not a matter that the UN has legislated upon.

What happends when the age of the clone is different?

:cool: Then the older one should gets more rights.

If the older one is a clone too,they should get equal rights.

So, wait. How exactly are clones any different from anything else? We act like they're exclusive, but they are just organisms like the rest of us, only they're identical to something else. I think we're looking at this the wrong way.

~Dr. Jules Hodz

"Why... thank you, doctor."

The Wolf Guardians;12896953']"Why... thank you, doctor."

OOC: I tend to think that way.

IC:

Categorizing people as "clones" is no different than categorizing people into races or ethnicities. I may be white, and you may be black, but we're both human, so we're the same. The same goes for clones. Clones are already protected by the many and numerous Human Rights proposals already on the books.

The issue is, therefore, moot.

I'm sure the name "Human Rights" is a misnomer, but the process to change the name of a category is so long that it takes two millenia plus several trillion dollars.

~Dr. Jules Hodz

Wolfgang looks at himself. "Human? Eh, close enough. I agree, the point is pretty moot. Sapient rights would solve this issue and many others for good, rather than focusing on a single category repeatedly."

The Wolf Guardians;12897077']Sapient rights would solve this issue and many others for good, rather than focusing on a single category repeatedly.Damn straight.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/UN/Verm.jpg
Vermithrax Pejorative
UN Observer
The Federated Technocratic Oligarchy of the Most Glorious Hack

If you sit twelve people in a room and they do act the same but all look different. Which one(s) are clones and which one(s) are not. Also which ones(s) are human as in NS there are many human looking beings who find it offensive when you pack them in with that low class bunch of insane humans.

Many nations find the humans to be more problems and want to be rid of them but honor the rules set by the NSUN and treat them with some respect as long as they follow the same rules and treat in return with respect but it has been our finding that humans are not to be trusted.


General Moomaar,
Chief of Defense Cavirra

Resolution:

The NSUN decalares that if 2 organisms have the same DNA, and age, they have the same legal rights.

This wording would apply not only to humans, but to every cloneable spicies; humans and leek alike. We do not believe that the rights of an organism should be decided by their biological history. General regulations, e.g. UNR26, should be fully able to do that.

Damn straight.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/UN/Verm.jpg
Vermithrax Pejorative
UN Observer
The Federated Technocratic Oligarchy of the Most Glorious Hack

"Really, I don't understand this nonsense of trying to cover each class of persons and their rights, instead of one thing that covers everyone. I also don't understand why people don't seem to understand that when we try for sapient rights issues. We're talking about everyone, regardless of what they are, being given equal rights provided they meet the certain criteria to be sapient. Clones would be included, assuming they were cloned from a sapient species, right? This multiverse is so vast and filled with infinitely unique beings, and we're going to fill the queue with resolutions before we even begin to start to almost cover everyone.

"Uh... sorry about that. I seem to be venting."

"Equal Rights for Clones". Xanga. April 23rd, 2008 - "I'm sad to say that my beloved xanga community is a hotbed of rampant discrimination. Accounts I admire and respect are hating on me because of the manner of my creation. I can't help being a second generation account. It's not my fault I was created. Don't I deserve the chance to earn respect based on my own words and actions? Don't I deserve to experience love based on my own character and personality? Can't we all just get along? Where is the love, xanga?"

-A particularly rarely used clone is created, wakes up, and joins the debate.


Death Panels for Clones! Err, for this resolution to ban death panels for clones.