NationStates Jolt Archive

IT IS RESOLVED:

1) A corpse shall not by force of law be exposed to the natural elements or carrion birds, no matter the severity of the crime the person committed in life.

2) No person shall by force of law be forced to dig its own grave.

3) To demand ransom for the return of a corpse of a person to its family or its nation, is an act which shall be punished with the same severity as kidnappings or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, whatever is applicable.

4) People who died by means of suicide or euthanasia shall not be deprived of civil or military titles for the sole reason of suicide, nor their dependants, if any, be denied any applicable pension of benefits or have them reduced.

a. Religious entities shall retain full reins in dictating its stance and actions towards people who died by means of suicide or euthanasia, including, but not limited to, denial of rites and denial of burial in grounds deemed of religious significance.

5) Mass graves are strictly forbidden.

6) Any sexual acts involving corpses are strictly forbidden.

7) Any adult person of sound mind in the presence of a witness is entitled to authorize the donation of its body after death for strict scientific research purposes. The receiving institution shall not transfer any part of the body to other institutions, unless expressly stated on the donation documents.

8) Indigenous tribes shall retain full freedom to dispose of corpses as they may see fit, as long as they do not violate the previous clauses, and as long as it does not pose a sanitary or health risk to themselves or other populations.

(OOC:
- OMG, again? Oh no, not again...
- Oh yes, Virginia, again. Another trial balloon. Fire at will, that's where the fun is ;))

4) People who died by means of suicide or euthanasia shall not be deprived of civil or military titles for the sole reason of suicide, nor their dependants, if any, be denied any applicable pension of benefits or have them reduced.You lost me there. I'm sure you know why.

Regards,
Dr. Bradford Castro
Chief Ambassador, Foreign Affairs Agency
Regional Delegate, Jordia

- Oh yes, Virginia, again. Another trial balloon. Fire at will, that's where the fun is
Maybe for you; for the rest of us, it's not so much 'fun' as 'fucking annoying'. Your last 'trial balloon' ended up being, by some way, the most stupendously silly resolution the WA has ever passed, surpassing even the Veterans Reform Act in its sheer disconnect from common sense. Are you posting this because you, in what would be a new development, have even the slightest bit of interest in what any of us might have to say about your proposal? If not, I think I'll pass.

And if this proposal isn't a category violation my name is Elmo Fudgesucker.

IT IS RESOLVED:

1) A corpse shall not by force of law be exposed to the natural elements or carrion birds, no matter the severity of the crime the person committed in life.

The five Eluneyasan delegates just look at each other.

"Um... What about if the corpse is up and moving around? You know, like animated through fel magics or a plague of undeath?" Silara asked.

2) No person shall by force of law be forced to dig its own grave.

3) To demand ransom for the return of a corpse of a person to its family or its nation, is an act which shall be punished with the same severity as kidnappings or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, whatever is applicable.

4) People who died by means of suicide or euthanasia shall not be deprived of civil or military titles for the sole reason of suicide, nor their dependants, if any, be denied any applicable pension of benefits or have them reduced.

"Even if suicide is against the law?" Silara asked.

a. Religious entities shall retain full reins in dictating its stance and actions towards people who died by means of suicide or euthanasia, including, but not limited to, denial of rites and denial of burial in grounds deemed of religious significance.

"What about theocracies?" Thundra asked. "How do they fit in?"

5) Mass graves are strictly forbidden.

"Even if they're war memorials, with the soldiers intended to remain anonymous to foster peace between the two sides, or graves holding plague bodies that cannot be disposed of via other means?" Thundra asked.

"You know, given the reaction of the ambassador from Quintessence of Dust, we are going to keep a healthy distance from this one..." Terrim said, right before setting his copy of the proposal on fire.

Maybe for you; for the rest of us, it's not so much 'fun' as 'fucking annoying'. Your last 'trial balloon' ended up being, by some way, the most stupendously silly resolution the WA has ever passed, surpassing even the Veterans Reform Act in its sheer disconnect from common sense.

Okie dokie, Esteemed Author of the Very Respectable garbage "Ban on Competitive Eating". Oh, by the way, "the rest of us"? Congratulations, I wasn't informed of your elevation to Secretary General.

Are you posting this because you, in what would be a new development, have even the slightest bit of interest in what any of us might have to say about your proposal? If not, I think I'll pass.

And if this proposal isn't a category violation my name is Elmo Fudgesucker.

Obviously you haven't noticed, of willingly ignored the multiple and exhausting changes I've done to the previous resolutions of my authorship. Pass it if you will, but you're welcome to throw a knife.

That said, why a category violation? I haven't even stated one!

IT IS RESOLVED:

1) A corpse shall not by force of law be exposed to the natural elements or carrion birds, no matter the severity of the crime the person committed in life.


Completely agreed there.

2) No person shall by force of law be forced to dig its own grave.

We have some citizens who choose to do so, but it is by choice, not law, so no problems here. Don't ask me why they do. I don't fully understand their culture.

3) To demand ransom for the return of a corpse of a person to its family or its nation, is an act which shall be punished with the same severity as kidnappings or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, whatever is applicable.


Again, agreed.

4) People who died by means of suicide or euthanasia shall not be deprived of civil or military titles for the sole reason of suicide, nor their dependants, if any, be denied any applicable pension of benefits or have them reduced.

This one could be sticky. Some insurance companies have a suicide clause. Since Rutianas is on a national health system with no need for insurance companies, we would have no issue with this ourselves, though others may.

a. Religious entities shall retain full reins in dictating its stance and actions towards people who died by means of suicide or euthanasia, including, but not limited to, denial of rites and denial of burial in grounds deemed of religious significance.

Agreed. We have a few religious communities that refuse to hold a full funeral for suicide cases. When that happens, the Republic will typically hold their own for the family.

5) Mass graves are strictly forbidden.

While we would normally agree with this, we do want to point out that sometimes this may be an issue. In some of the less technologically advanced nations, illness may run rampant, causing many to die at a single point in time. The construction of a mass grave is usually done in order to safeguard the living from the disease. To tell these nations that they can no longer provide that protection may cause some issues.

6) Any sexual acts involving corpses are strictly forbidden.

Oh, most definitely agreed.

7) Any adult person of sound mind in the presence of a witness is entitled to authorize the donation of its body after death for strict scientific research purposes. The receiving institution shall not transfer any part of the body to other institutions, unless expressly stated on the donation documents.

Agreed. This should be a person's individual choice.

8) Indigenous tribes shall retain full freedom to dispose of corpses as they may see fit, as long as they do not violate the previous clauses, and as long as it does not pose a sanitary or health risk to themselves or other populations.

This will please the other two races that are within the Republic. They prefer to take care of their own deceased how they see fit. I can safely guarantee that they do not violate any of this proposal.

In short, the Republic does have some issues with the proposal, however, we are fully prepared to stand in support.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

Okie dokie, Esteemed Author of the Very Respectable garbage "Ban on Competitive Eating".You know, for all the bother my proposal has caused, no one has yet provided a solid argument against it.

My proposal aims to help living people, and stop them from dying. Yours is concerned with making them pretty once it's too late and they're dead. I know which I'd be prouder of writing.Obviously you haven't noticed, of willingly ignored the multiple and exhausting changes I've done to the previous resolutions of my authorship.So why did "Access to Life-Saving Drugs" crash and burn?

'Trial balloon' is a turn of phrase. Trial balloons sometimes get shot down. Kelssek and others offered a particularly strident critique of your proposal, which elicited zero response while you tinkered with cosmetic details. Yet you continued with it and have now saddled the WA with the task of dealing with it.That said, why a category violation? I haven't even stated one!Of course not: there is no category you could possibly state. Some clauses are Human Rights, some clauses are Moral Decency.

This seems to have been written with a severe ignorance of the customs of certain religions.

You know, for all the bother my proposal has caused, no one has yet provided a solid argument against it.


OOC: Because there isn't one? :rolleyes: Maybe a new thread should be started on it?

This seems to have been written with a severe ignorance of the customs of certain religions.

OOC: I really doubt there's any religion that could possibly exist, save one, which got any nods to it by this "proposal."

OOC: I really doubt there's any religion that could possibly exist, save one, which got any nods to it by this "proposal."

You obviously are ignorant of a number of religions which mandate exposing their dead.

I welcome your anger, bring it on when needed, I just cannot see why it sprung up.

You know, for all the bother my proposal has caused, no one has yet provided a solid argument against it.

My proposal aims to help living people, and stop them from dying.

And no one will ever bring a solid argument about it. It is good for a municipal ordinance, not for the WA. On that line, why not bring a "Ban on Children Running with Knifes"?

I know which I'd be prouder of writing.

It is a laudable municipal ordinance.

Yet you continued with it and have now saddled the WA with the task of dealing with it.

(OOC: Well, my RL obligations pre-submission rendered my time very short, and zero after that. That's all I'll say about the debate of the AtLSD.)

About "saddling" the WA. I plead guilty to have a hand on that. But, you know, 3269 voters (73%) also helped.

Some clauses are Human Rights, some clauses are Moral Decency.

Here you have a substantive point. I ask for ambassadors' and mods' guidance about the relevance of the point and how to fix it if there are indeed troubles.

Yours truly,

You obviously are ignorant of a number of religions which mandate exposing their dead.

No, I was stating that I suspect the author of this was pretty much ignoring all religions, except for a single one, when they first came up with this.

We in Balawaristan regard the Zoroastrian funerary practice with disgust, their religious obligation to expose corpses to the elements and the birds. Similarly, we take a harsh view of the exposure of corpses by various Buddhist sects. All this is unhygienic and contributes to the spread of human pathogens, and must be outlawed throughout the world, as it is in Balawaristan.

Our own Zoroastrian and Buddhist communities, we may report, have joined in the perpetual revolution and have disavowed their false sects and now march arm-in-arm with their sisters and brothers in the common faith of the workman in the universal value of humanity against the oppression by the bourgeois.

We kindly ask that section 7 be modified to allow for policies of universal compulsory organ donation and scientific research on specimens retrieved from the deceased. This is far more humane and respectful than allowing valuable tissues to serve no social good.

Here you have a substantive point. I ask for ambassadors' and mods' guidance about the relevance of the point and how to fix it if there are indeed troubles.

Yours truly,

OOC: How about reading the other posts in the thread.

You obviously are ignorant of a number of religions which mandate exposing their dead.

That's why I put drafts through forum fire before submitting them. It is a most valid point, and will be addressed in the next version.

I welcome your anger, bring it on when needed, I just cannot see why it sprung up.I'm not angry, I'm irritated; and I've already explained the provenance: this is exactly what happened last time, but once the balloon had been shot down, you proceeded to submit it anyway. This does not particularly promote faith that time spent making criticism of this proposal would be productive.
And no one will ever bring a solid argument about it. It is good for a municipal ordinance, not for the WA. On that line, why not bring a "Ban on Children Running with Knifes"?
...
It is a laudable municipal ordinance.
I'm not going to derail this into a discussion of my own proposal; this about yours. But I will note it's especially odd that you're so insistent about the appropriate scope on this issue, given your own legislation hardly leaps out as an international issue. A corpse, by definition, doesn't cross international borders. People come from different countries to engage in eating contests, and the food they eat could be redistributed to others. It's rare, I would imagine, for someone to come from another country to poke a corpse.

You claim my proposal is 'garbage' because it's not about an international topic. This exact criticism was levelled at the Outlaw Necrophilia resolution during its debate. This isn't a proposal in the fashion of the Wateranan legislation on War Dead Repatriation; rather, it's about something the proposal itself seems to acknowledge tends to be intrinsic to intranational cultures.

If you're going to criticise proposals for not being suitable for international legislation, you might want to edge away from the giant elephant in the corner first.
About "saddling" the WA. I plead guilty to have a hand on that. But, you know, 3269 voters (73%) also helped.I fully agree: that the voters do not always make the most informed decisions make pre-vote vetting all the more important.
Here you have a substantive point. I ask for ambassadors' and mods' guidance about the relevance of the point and how to fix it if there are indeed troubles.Ask all you want, but as Bob Flibble always says, you write the proposal to the category, not the other way around.
That's why I put drafts through forum fire before submitting them. It is a most valid point, and will be addressed in the next version.
You still don't get it, do you?

The first question to be asked of a proposal is not "what changes do I make?" but "should I proceed with it in the first place?"

Frankly how the subject of this statute is in anyway an international issue is utterly beyond our ability to understand.

This is not a human rights issue, nor is strictly speaking a moral decency issue.

Nothing about the content of this statute is of useful universal nature, it will have no improving effect upon the societies which constitute this organisation. It shows a deep and disturbing bias toward certain religious organisations while ignoring the concerns of others, and frankly why it should respect the doctrines of any religion while simultaneously ignoring the decisions and prerogatives of democratically elected governments.


The corpses of the Emperor's of Urgench are required by law to be exposed to public view and in the open air ( in a completely embalmed state ) for a period of 30 days before they may be incinerated. This tradition has been a part of our law for 1257 years, it would be a grievous insult to our national culture and constitutional provisions to bring this statute on to the books.

We strongly recommend that the honoured delegation of Sionis Prioratus drop this completely foolhardy project and concentrate their talents on efforts which will actually help living people live better lives, instead of insulting billions of peoples customs regarding mortality.


Yours,

It is a laudable municipal ordinance.

Which begs the question, "If it's a 'laudable municipal ordinance,' why are you wasting the time of an international organization with something that should be handled on a national level at most?"

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

A corpse shall not by force of law be exposed to the natural elements or carrion birds, no matter the severity of the crime the person committed in life.Can you clarify what "by force of law" means? While my government would find it utterly ridiculous to mandate corpses' exposure to the natural elements, as you put it, I hardly consider it the business of the WA to dictates other governments' policy in such a manner. Why is this an issue?

Indigenous tribes shall retain full freedom to dispose of corpses as they may see fit, as long as they do not violate the previous clauses, and as long as it does not pose a sanitary or health risk to themselves or other populations.Firstly, what do you mean by "indigenous tribes"? Secondly, does everybody else have the right to dispose of corpses in ways that do pose sanitary or health risks? If so, then this is a lamentable act of discrimination against "indigenous tribes". If not, then this clause is utterly useless.

Also, this is phrased poorly: "Religious entities shall retain full reins in dictating its stance and actions..." Either "entities...their stance" or "Each religious entity...its stance", etc. Even with this altered, though, it will be very difficult to convince me that this matter is of any relevance to the Assembly.

-Raymond Gardner,
Plutonian delegate

An interesting and, I must say, original proposal which the People of Aundotutunagir are vehemently OPPOSED to. In fact, we thirst for the blood of the bureaucrat(s) who concocted this bit of cultural imperialism. Allow me to explain.

IT IS RESOLVED:

1) A corpse shall not by force of law be exposed to the natural elements or carrion birds, no matter the severity of the crime the person committed in life.
It is the custom of some cultures (not ours) to allow corpses to be decomposed by the elements, eaten by birds, and soforth. It is likely that that method of disposing of a corpse might be prescribed by law in those cultures for religious or other reasons.

Also, as has already been pointed out, what about reanimated corpses? We are currently working on technology to accomplish reanimation. More on that later.

2) No person shall by force of law be forced to dig its own grave.I have no problem with this, but it does make sense from a labor standpoint to have people who are about to be executed dig their own graves. I mean, they're already there and have nothing better to do...

3) To demand ransom for the return of a corpse of a person to its family or its nation, is an act which shall be punished with the same severity as kidnappings or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, whatever is applicable.
Fine, but if they have no monetary value wouldn't those who would normally demand ransom for them just discard them or destroy them instead?

4) People who died by means of suicide or euthanasia shall not be deprived of civil or military titles for the sole reason of suicide, nor their dependants, if any, be denied any applicable pension of benefits or have them reduced.
So the dependants of those who commit suicide should be able to collect on any insurance policies the deceased might have had?

a. Religious entities shall retain full reins in dictating its stance and actions towards people who died by means of suicide or euthanasia, including, but not limited to, denial of rites and denial of burial in grounds deemed of religious significance.
OK.

5) Mass graves are strictly forbidden.
Why? There might be sanitary or public health reasons to quickly bury a large number of corpses in a mass grave.

6) Any sexual acts involving corpses are strictly forbidden.
Getting back to my previous comment on reanimating corpses.

Aundotutunagirian scientists are currently researching various methods of reanimating the dead. As you may (or may not?) be aware, my government has a policy of maximizing our nation's birth rate. We feel that reanimated female corpses would make excellent incubators for implanted fetuses. We're still working on some of the technical aspects of this, but it is entirely possible that it could involve implanted ova (or even the reanimated corpse's own ova? hmmm..) being fertilized in the "usual" way.

7) Any adult person of sound mind in the presence of a witness is entitled to authorize the donation of its body after death for strict scientific research purposes. The receiving institution shall not transfer any part of the body to other institutions, unless expressly stated on the donation documents.
OK.

8) Indigenous tribes shall retain full freedom to dispose of corpses as they may see fit, as long as they do not violate the previous clauses, and as long as it does not pose a sanitary or health risk to themselves or other populations.
There were no human inhabitants of what is now Aundotutunagir when my ancestors arrived there. Do we count as indigenous?

Which begs the question, "If it's a 'laudable municipal ordinance,' why are you wasting the time of an international organization with something that should be handled on a national level at most?"

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

Well, you happen to be right.

Quod, you happen to be wrong. Trial ballons are trial ballons, and this one is officially shot down. I dunno what'll happen to your faith in Sionis Prioratus, but... whatever.

I did read the necro-thing in the old UN (long time ago) and thought it was ridiculous (as the majority of things there). So, although I found it necessary to include it in this text, I still think it would be ridiculous of an international organization to issue a proclamation on this sole issue.

After reading all the opinions (thank you all) I'm convinced of the prerrogative of national governments on this area.

I'll try not to be too graphic: People do cross borders to do graphic things with children. Please spare me to describe the next "logical" step, insofar this flat ballon deals with the deceased. Some perverts will cross borders to poke corpses. I think it is an internationally worthy topic. But I won't be the standard-bearer against the necro-thing. Closed.

The rest? OK, national governments.

Thank you all and as always,
Yours truly.

The question that remains, though:

Why on earth does a Moral Decency category even exists?

Any "Moral Decency" text will prompt cries and howls of "national culture!", "tradition!", "NatSov!", and whatnot.

So, why, in the first place? Is there anything logical and passable and legal under "Moral Decency"?

And after reviewing the passed Reslt's, there's not even one Moral Decency Reslt., not even one that was repealed.

So again... :confused:

Thank you.

Also, as has already been pointed out, what about reanimated corpses? We are currently working on technology to accomplish reanimation. More on that later.

Voodoo ? Noble General have your people completely lost their minds ?


So the dependants of those who commit suicide should be able to collect on any insurance policies the deceased might have had?

Why not ? Presumably Aundotutunagir has no problem allowing the architects of its mass rape program to draw government pensions, are suicides so much more reprehensible ? Only in the most psychotic conception of morality perhaps.


Getting back to my previous comment on reanimating corpses.

Aundotutunagirian scientists are currently researching various methods of reanimating the dead. As you may (or may not?) be aware, my government has a policy of maximizing our nation's birth rate. We feel that reanimated female corpses would make excellent incubators for implanted fetuses. We're still working on some of the technical aspects of this, but it is entirely possible that it could involve implanted ova (or even the reanimated corpse's own ova? hmmm..) being fertilized in the "usual" way.

So now necrophilia, the defilement of cadavers is the sexual predilection which Aundotutunagir's "Alien-Witch Doctor Overlords" currently endorse ? Seriously ? So now the women of Aundotutunagir will be raped even after they die ? Is there no limit to the depths of depravity to which the Noble General's government will sink ?

If we hadn't had large doses of strong drugs with our supper we would currently be finding it difficult to keep said meal down.




There were no human inhabitants of what is now Aundotutunagir when my ancestors arrived there. Do we count as indigenous?


We are beginning to wonder if Aundotutunagir has ever had Human inhabitants.


Yours,

Elmo Fudgesucker

ELMO FUDGESUCKER FOR WA SECRETARIAT !! :)

Vote for Change you can bet your Fudge on.
'cause my main man Elmo is bringing the suck back in Fudge.

So, why, in the first place? Is there anything logical and passable and legal under "Moral Decency"?If we have a "Human Rights" category it's only fair we have a "Moral Decency" one as well. It seems as if the Assembly happens to support personal freedoms, on the whole; Moral Decency has been a historically unpopular category. That said, our illustrious predecessor passed Moral Decency resolutions outlawing pedophilia and child pornography, and by large margins too. So it can be done, it just happens to be the case that it...doesn't very often.

Also, as has already been pointed out, what about reanimated corpses? We are currently working on technology to accomplish reanimation. More on that later.

"Our's was done by an invading army of demons bent on scouring all life from the universe. If you want to talk to them, I think we can provide you with what you need to summon them," Silara said, writing on a piece of paper.

"Isn't that the Ice Nine spell she's writing down?" Terrim whispered to Thundra.

"Yes, it is," Thundra whispered back.

Getting back to my previous comment on reanimating corpses.

Aundotutunagirian scientists are currently researching various methods of reanimating the dead. As you may (or may not?) be aware, my government has a policy of maximizing our nation's birth rate. We feel that reanimated female corpses would make excellent incubators for implanted fetuses. We're still working on some of the technical aspects of this, but it is entirely possible that it could involve implanted ova (or even the reanimated corpse's own ova? hmmm..) being fertilized in the "usual" way.

The delegates from Eluneyasa could only stare in horror.

"Please, for the love of all that is holy, do not ever mention anything we have done in connection with your nation, your people, or anything having to do with you ever again," Thundra said.

Voodoo ? Noble General have your people completely lost their minds ?
Oh not Voodoo. Don't be silly. This is an actual technology we're working on.

Why not ? Presumably Aundotutunagir has no problem allowing the architects of its mass rape program to draw government pensions, are suicides so much more reprehensible ? Only in the most psychotic conception of morality perhaps.
It opens up the possibility of insurance fraud.

And we don't have a "mass rape program". I wish you would stop spreading that vile propaganda about us.

So now necrophilia, the defilement of cadavers is the sexual predilection which Aundotutunagir's "Alien-Witch Doctor Overlords" currently endorse ? Seriously ? So now the women of Aundotutunagir will be raped even after they die ? Is there no limit to the depths of depravity to which the Noble General's government will sink ?
A corpse is not a person. It is a thing. If a person has sex with a tree or an automobile would you consider that rape?

If we hadn't had large doses of strong drugs with our supper we would currently be finding it difficult to keep said meal down.
Khan of Kashgar, your illicit drug use disturbs me. It is unseemly for a person of your station to indulge in these habits.

We are beginning to wonder if Aundotutunagir has ever had Human inhabitants.
I'm not sure what you mean.

"Our's was done by an invading army of demons bent on scouring all life from the universe. If you want to talk to them, I think we can provide you with what you need to summon them," Silara said, writing on a piece of paper.

"Isn't that the Ice Nine spell she's writing down?" Terrim whispered to Thundra.

"Yes, it is," Thundra whispered back.
No, no, as I explained to the sadly drug-addled Ambassador from Urgench, we have a technology which will soon allow us to do this. I'll have a look at this "spell" of yours though.



The delegates from Eluneyasa could only stare in horror.

"Please, for the love of all that is holy, do not ever mention anything we have done in connection with your nation, your people, or anything having to do with you ever again," Thundra said.
What? I've done you no harm. Why do you foreigners always take offense at the most minor things?

If a person has sex with a tree or an automobile would you consider that rape?

Not until I get the "Rights and Freedoms of a Cherry Tree" passed.

Take that George Washington.

No, no, as I explained to the sadly drug-addled Ambassador from Urgench, we have a technology which will soon allow us to do this. I'll have a look at this "spell" of yours though.

"Sure!" And with that, Silara began to scribble faster.

"Prep the transport. Make sure we're off this planet in ten minutes," Terrim whispered. "I don't want to be here when they realize what it does."

Gorrim, Thundra, and Engle nodded, rushing out of the room. Silara, standing, walked over to hand the spell to the diplomat from Aundotutunagir.

"You have to submerge the corpse in water before the cast the spell," the elf said, right before following Terrim out the door. "Call us when you cast it!"

Silara, standing, walked over to hand the spell to the diplomat from Aundotutunagir.

"You have to submerge the corpse in water before the cast the spell," the elf said, right before following Terrim out the door. "Call us when you cast it!"
Hiriaurtung Arororugul starts reading the spell to himself, then stops.

"Does it matter if it is salt water or fresh water?

But it was too late for his question to be answered. Silara had already left the building.

"I wonder why they left in such a hurry?"

This is really what you think the WA should be spending time and money on? Protecting the rights of dead people? How about we solve problems with living people's rights first.

1) A corpse shall not by force of law be exposed to the natural elements or carrion birds, no matter the severity of the crime the person committed in life.

This does make sense for another reason as well. Leaving corpses out to be exposed to the elements and carrion birds spreads disease and this is a threat to the world's health.

2) No person shall by force of law be forced to dig its own grave.

I can live with that, we don't bury people who we execute, we incinerate their bodies in a celebration during our four "Days of Flame and Fury" throughout the year.

3) To demand ransom for the return of a corpse of a person to its family or its nation, is an act which shall be punished with the same severity as kidnappings or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, whatever is applicable.

Again, I agree. It's bad enough that you killed them (most of this is done by the person who killed them, like with soldiers killed overseas and such), but then to hold their body for ransom...Let's just say that anyone who does that with the body of one of Divinen's Lightning Blade will have a particle beam dropped on them.

4) People who died by means of suicide or euthanasia shall not be deprived of civil or military titles for the sole reason of suicide, nor their dependants, if any, be denied any applicable pension of benefits or have them reduced.

This should be eliminated. I like that if a person chooses euthanasia over a painful terminal illness that it protects their life insurance, but that is the only part of this article that should remain. I can help the OP write it if they wish.

a. Religious entities shall retain full reins in dictating its stance and actions towards people who died by means of suicide or euthanasia, including, but not limited to, denial of rites and denial of burial in grounds deemed of religious significance.

Should the first part of this be removed, this can go too.

5) Mass graves are strictly forbidden.

In the event of a disease crisis, the diseased corpses should be burnt to destroy the disease rather than buried. I agree with this, however I would include that if an entire platoon of soldiers is wiped out and cannot be identified individually that something of this nature be exempted.

6) Any sexual acts involving corpses are strictly forbidden.

Fully agreed, but addressing Eluneyasa's concern about the plague of undeath and the other ambassador's (can't be arsed to check who) concern about his technology: Do said reanimated corpses have the rights to perform sexual acts? Put an exemption for this please, so that we can ban necrophilia and still not interfere in these practices.

7) Any adult person of sound mind in the presence of a witness is entitled to authorize the donation of its body after death for strict scientific research purposes. The receiving institution shall not transfer any part of the body to other institutions, unless expressly stated on the donation documents.

Does this affect compulsory organ donorship? I don't belive it would because organ donorship does not fall under scientific research, but if it does infringe on our policy it needs removed.

8) Indigenous tribes shall retain full freedom to dispose of corpses as they may see fit, as long as they do not violate the previous clauses, and as long as it does not pose a sanitary or health risk to themselves or other populations.

I know where the OP is going with this. He wants a tribe (say, the shamanistic tribe that live on Burning Stone Mountain in northern Divinen) to be able to honor their dead as they see fit (they throw their dead into the mouth of the volcano, they believe that if they don't do so that the volcano god will destroy their village). The problem comes from when an indigenous tribe's religion states to leave corpses out in the open. But this article is entirely unnecessary, as the resolution does not restrict the rights of indigneous tribes anyway.

Fully agreed, but addressing Eluneyasa's concern about the plague of undeath and the other ambassador's (can't be arsed to check who) concern about his technology: Do said reanimated corpses have the rights to perform sexual acts? Put an exemption for this please, so that we can ban necrophilia and still not interfere in these practices.

OOC: To clarify: The homeworld of Eluneyasa, Azeroth, has an entire nation made up of undead... a nation which currently stretches across half a continent. This nation being former allies of much of the current makeup of Eluneyasa, and still on friendly terms with the commonwealth. Thus, their concern is a lot more of a "how do we explain to our friends and possible future members on this" than a "what if" scenario.

And on particular note, some of these undead, like the Death Knights in particular, are actually fully intact; they became undead while still alive, instead of rising from being a corpse, and thus have suffered no decay.

No irony here: I'm constantly amazed by the ontological diversity of the peoples of the Nations of the World Assembly.

Serious question: Are there out there Nations composed of ghosts, other ectoplasmatic creatures, heads-on-a-plate, tesseracts, borgs, Cerberi, Fungi, Great Old Ones (Cthulhu fhtagn!) or a combination of any of these?

No irony here: I'm constantly amazed by the ontological diversity of the peoples of the Nations of the World Assembly.

Serious question: Are there out there Nations composed of ghosts, other ectoplasmatic creatures, heads-on-a-plate, tesseracts, borgs, Cerberi, Fungi, Great Old Ones (Cthulhu fhtagn!) or a combination of any of these?

I know of at least one borg nation in NS.

Oh not Voodoo. Don't be silly. This is an actual technology we're working on.

Oh yes because of course Voodoo is silly Noble General, and criminal waste of your people's resources and ingenuity in pursuit of the "technological" reanimation of the dead with the grotesque aim of copulating with them is perfectly sensible.



And we don't have a "mass rape program". I wish you would stop spreading that vile propaganda about us.

If it roars like a Camel, and it spits like a camel, it is a camel, your own government is responsible for the grim impression created by its own disgusting actions, not us.


A corpse is not a person. It is a thing. If a person has sex with a tree or an automobile would you consider that rape?

Not with an automobile or a tree no, but with an animal yes. Surely a reanimated corpse would have at least some logical similarities with an animal of primitive intelligence no ?


Khan of Kashgar, your illicit drug use disturbs me. It is unseemly for a person of your station to indulge in these habits.

But you would admire me if I indulged in Aundotutunagir's favourite methods of stress relief, rape and necrophilia ? In any event you would find it difficult to meet an Urgenchi of any station in life who was not a habitual user of several licit drugs, and had I not been such a user I would have been dead of old age more than 150 years ago.


I'm not sure what you mean.

Humans have not in any culture that is recorded been able to philosophically justify the sexual defilement of corpses as anything else than the deranged sickness of a mentally unstable minority, on the scale the Noble General is discussing such justification would seem to us to be indicative of some inhuman and monstrous consciousness.


No, no, as I explained to the sadly drug-addled Ambassador from Urgench, we have a technology which will soon allow us to do this. I'll have a look at this "spell" of yours though.

You should know honoured Ambassador that we received word from the Security Secretariat of the CSKU to the effect that if your Excellency does in fact use that incantation and it is successful at the Thaumaturgical reanimation of the dead, we are to authorise our delegation's expert in Shamanic practices, the chap from Trans-Baikalia, to do everything within his power to insure that Aundotutunagir cannot use the spell without provoking its own total destruction.


Yours,

You should know honoured Ambassador that we received word from the Security Secretariat of the CSKU to the effect that if your Excellency does in fact use that incantation and it is successful at the Thaumaturgical reanimation of the dead, we are to authorise our delegation's expert in Shamanic practices, the chap from Trans-Baikalia, to do everything within his power to insure that Aundotutunagir cannot use the spell without provoking its own total destruction.


Yours,

Strangely, at about this moment, the Urgench ambassador would be delivered a note, with details about the Ice 9 spell. The note ends with, "There's still room on the shuttle, if you're coming."

Strangely, at about this moment, the Urgench ambassador would be delivered a note, with details about the Ice 9 spell. The note ends with, "There's still room on the shuttle, if you're coming."

Mongkha turns to Tarmashirin and says " Tell the Shaman the details of this note will you and see to it that we are completely prepared for the results if the Noble General is fool enough to use the spell. Oh and send the delegation of Eluneyasa a casket of those black Arctic Pearls which his Excellency the Minister sent to us when we were canvassing support for the CoCR. I believe those pearls have unusual properties "

Are there out there Nations composed of [...] Great Old Ones (Cthulhu fhtagn!)Funny you should mention this. Well, not composed of one, but when Mt. Voormithadreth is in your back yard, you takes your lumps.

As for why I (and not the good Doctor) am replying, well... the Doctor's a little drunk and finds this "funny". At any rate, here's the Oligarchy's views on this proposal. Then again, we're not members, so you all can screw yourselves for all the Director cares.

Ahem.

1) A corpse shall not by force of law be exposed to the natural elements or carrion birds, no matter the severity of the crime the person committed in life.The Oligarchy finds this to be an unreasonable trampling of many neo-pagan and primativist nations and religions that wish for their dead to return to the Earth. Or the spirits. Or whatever it is they believe in (sorry, a little cranky today). Personally, there were numerous occasions back in my youth where such practices provided a tasty snack. Fresh corpses don't really run, so it was handy if you were desperate.

2) No person shall by force of law be forced to dig its own grave.This seems unnecessary to the Oligarchy. Almost as if it was added because of a potential "squick" factor. But, personally, I can see how it might be cruel or unusual.

3) To demand ransom for the return of a corpse of a person to its family or its nation, is an act which shall be punished with the same severity as kidnappings or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, whatever is applicable.The Oligarchy is fine with outlawing the ransoming of corpses, but as they are not people, such actions should be punished like one would punish theft. Sorry, corpses.

4) People who died by means of suicide or euthanasia shall not be deprived of civil or military titles for the sole reason of suicide, nor their dependants, if any, be denied any applicable pension of benefits or have them reduced.Yeah, the insurance problems have been mentioned previously. We agree with those concerns.

a. Religious entities shall retain full reins in dictating its stance and actions towards people who died by means of suicide or euthanasia, including, but not limited to, denial of rites and denial of burial in grounds deemed of religious significance.How can you have a subclause A without a subclause B? Regardless, this is fine. Religions can withhold their services as they deem fit. Well, that last line is potentially problematic. If the religion in question has property rights over the "religious[ly] signific[ant]" territory, it's fine. If someone else owns the property, the religion's out of luck on that one. Religion doesn't trump property rights.

5) Mass graves are strictly forbidden.You better hope to hell a plague doesn't hit. Also, it's likely that there's some religions out there that prefer mass graves.

6) Any sexual acts involving corpses are strictly forbidden.Moralizing. I mean, I agree, but I don't think it's really in the WA's purview.

7) Any adult person...Yeah, sure. We're fine with this.

8) Indigenous tribes shall retain full freedom to dispose of corpses as they may see fit, as long as they do not violate the previous clauses...So, a nation's laws can be ignored, but not the mighty WA? How internationalist of you.


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

1) A corpse shall not by force of law be exposed to the natural elements or carrion birds, no matter the severity of the crime the person committed in life.


So if two people are hiking in the desert, one falls and dies, the other goes for help without taking precautions to protect the other the second person is guilty of... failing to protect a corpse?

2) No person shall by force of law be forced to dig its own grave.

Be tough to prove, but we're fine with it.


3) To demand ransom for the return of a corpse of a person to its family or its nation, is an act which shall be punished with the same severity as kidnappings or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, whatever is applicable.

Agreed with Hack, it is theft, at best.


4) People who died by means of suicide or euthanasia shall not be deprived of civil or military titles for the sole reason of suicide, nor their dependants, if any, be denied any applicable pension of benefits or have them reduced.


Woah... how is this proper handling of corpse? This is an estate question, and completely from left field. Could make it illegal in that it takes a moral decency proposal and add tort reform to it.


a. Religious entities shall retain full reins in dictating its stance and actions towards people who died by means of suicide or euthanasia, including, but not limited to, denial of rites and denial of burial in grounds deemed of religious significance.

K

5) Mass graves are strictly forbidden.

Not opposed, but wondering about the practicality in the case of a war or possible epidemic disease.

6) Any sexual acts involving corpses are strictly forbidden.

K.

7) Any adult person of sound mind in the presence of a witness is entitled to authorize the donation of its body after death for strict scientific research purposes. The receiving institution shall not transfer any part of the body to other institutions, unless expressly stated on the donation documents.

Does this also include organ donation? If so there are time when organs harvested go to different institutions for different donors. Does this make that practice illegal?

8) Indigenous tribes shall retain full freedom to dispose of corpses as they may see fit, as long as they do not violate the previous clauses, and as long as it does not pose a sanitary or health risk to themselves or other populations.

Several necrophiliac, mass grave tribes just heaved a collective sigh of relief.

Several necrophiliac, mass grave tribes just heaved a collective sigh of relief.

Just to point something out...

8) Indigenous tribes shall retain full freedom to dispose of corpses as they may see fit, as long as they do not violate the previous clauses, and as long as it does not pose a sanitary or health risk to themselves or other populations.

Those indigenous tribes are free to do what they want, provided they don't violate the clauses in the proposal. So, those necrophiliac, mass grave tribes would be shafted, so to speak.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

Frankly, ensuring the rights of people who, by definition, don't care anymore strikes us as not worth the cost of offending the billions of people who don't follow the religious customs that this proposal assumes. Certain parts could be reasonable, such as "right to not have your family punished because you committed suicide," but otherwise this is just a waste of time.

Douglas Moore
Secy. to the WA

. So, those necrophiliac, mass grave tribes would be shafted, so to speak.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador


I stand corrected, but still opposed. More so now as I'm no mood to field complaint calls from the mass necrophiliac grave tribes I have in my nation. My assistants head just now turned back to normal and we have yet to find that doll of our translator....

I stand corrected, but still opposed. More so now as I'm no mood to field complaint calls from the mass necrophiliac grave tribes I have in my nation. My assistants head just now turned back to normal and we have yet to find that doll of our translator....

Yes, after hearing a lot of the arguments, the Republic has decided that this is not something we'd like to see passed. There's too much in there that make little sense to include.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

How are the sapient Whales whose representatives have appeared here from time to time supposed to bury their dead -- let alone cremate them -- instead of just leaving them exposed to the "natural element" of Water?

For all the amusement and/or rage some have found in this thread, isn't it time to let this corpse of a draft be exposed to the elements and carrion birds, or be buried in a mass grave?

(No sex acts, please. Not in the mood.)

Wouldn't there be a provision that allows humans to naturally rot away in the wild country without interference if they wish, just as long that doesn't cause a plague?

All I ask is that this thread may be left to rot in peace... it suffered more than its lot in life.

(Again, again, again... I'm not submitting this. Not in the foreseeable future. And I always think in long-terms)