NationStates Jolt Archive

We have a question on R99 and this clause in light of what is going on with the current proposal at vote.. and how R99 is noted in that proposal as defective and needing additional effort to end discrimination.

REQUIRES member governments to fairly and equally apply the following rights of citizens as they are upheld by international and national law: Note the part in bold as we find nothing to declare who's nation they are citizen of but will assume they are of the nation involved as a member of the UN... thus if somebody comes from outside our nation and is not a citizen they are not covered under R99.. It only applies to citizens of a given nation having rights in that nation being applied equal.

Some how we see the current one trying to ammend this fault in R99 and not repealing it.... and would like some feed back from others on this....

Also our concern here with giving anyone rights equal to those a citizen has earned would be wrong, as citizens pay for many of the benifits they get as citizens while those not citizens bleed off it..... and pay nothing into the system... thus make a healthy state a poor welfare state.

Is this a case of splitting hairs?

Is this a case of splitting hairs?
Welcome to the NSUN!

-- George Madison

lol

Call it testing the waters to see if a repeal of both the current one that passed and R99 has any chance.

As noted in the debate on the current one some thought it needed to be amended to clear up the issue of UNFAIR - REASONABLE and just what it is. Since that debate came up then the floor is open for cause to repeal it on that. Also to get one on books that covers the actions of both Groups and Individuals one would have to repeal R99. Thus one simple resolution to cover any discrimination not several covering different views of the issue.

We beleive that it is individuals that discriminate not some company or nation.. as they are the core of any of these and only ones that can take any actions that might be seen as discrimination. Nations, Clubs, Schools, Churches without people just are not there....

Call it testing the waters to see if a repeal of both the current one that passed and R99 has any chance.

Actually, I would like to reread all of resolution 99, but based on the section you posted, it does look like that clause focused on citizens, leaving non-citizens untouched.

Is there another reference elsewhere that covers the rights of non-citizens in that resolution?

That said, if there is thought of revisiting this with a replacement resolution, my government still would like to see the focus of the plethora of human rights resolutions move towards issues that cross national borders.

We have not had time to review all but it refers to international laws which in itself if vague to us as who knows every law made, who even keeps track all of them..?

We do need a single resolution to clearly end discrimination and must be reminded that it individuals who discriminate.. as it takes individuals to make up Nations, Churhes, Clubs, Societies, Schools, and any group. Then unless you get the individual to end discrimination there will always be some form of it around.


As we don't believe that if you get together in a group and go out killing folks it any worse than if do it alone.. Crimes are crimes and individuals who commit them must pay as individuals not groups. Besides it hard to hang a dozen criminals using only one rope and tree..

We have not had time to review all but it refers to international laws which in itself if vague to us as who knows every law made, who even keeps track all of them..?
[quote]

I personally have problems keeping track of older resolutions. Fortunately I have my staff always perform analysis of recently passed resolutions so we can make recommendations for our Council of Mayors and all of the cantons. Since most UN resolutions are but recommendations, it is usually easy enough for us to determine if the cantons are within the basic scope of the topic. [OOC: I'm one who believes in the sovereign state model of the UN, meaning that member nations have much more freedom in determining if a resolution really applies to them or not. This is just one of many different RP theories.] :)

[QUOTE=Cavirra;13268327]
We do need a single resolution to clearly end discrimination and must be reminded that it individuals who discriminate.. as it takes individuals to make up Nations, Churhes, Clubs, Societies, Schools, and any group. Then unless you get the individual to end discrimination there will always be some form of it around.


This actually opens up the general discussion to a point that is generally held throughout my nation. Just like you can't enforce peace through war, you can't really promote equality by practicing discrimination. While anti-discrimination laws are well intended, many of them suffer numerous technical and legal "loopholes" and flaws that really end up just shifting discrimination around, while failing to really focus on education.

While this is just our opinion, and other opinions are certainly welcomed, Mikitivity would much rather see resolutions focusing on promoting education and awareness.