NationStates Jolt Archive

Or rather, to repeal legally or not to repeal legally ... ? Whatever; you get the idea:This Assembly,

AFFIRMING that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals are deserving of full and equal protection under the law;

REAFFIRMING its earlier stance in Resolution #99: Discrimination Accord, that the resolution Gay Rights "in practice does virtually nothing to protect citizens' rights";

ACKNOWLEDGING that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals are ALREADY afforded equal protections under international law through past declarations of this body; protections including, but not limited to:

1) Freedom to marry individuals of the same sex or gender;
2) Freedom to express their love for persons of the same gender;
3) Freedom from imprisonment based on sexuality;
4) Freedom from discrimination;
5) Freedom of sexual privacy; thus

DEEMING the Gay Rights resolution redundant and unnecessary;

MINDFUL that it is in the interests of the United Nations to streamline and strike out superfluous and ineffective legislation;

ADVISING member states that the enactment of this article will NOT permit them to discriminate against gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender individuals; hereby

REPEALS Gay Rights.I need advisement as to the legality of this repeal argument. Does it stay within the repeal parameters, with regard to the "no new provisions" rule?

On a first glance, I'd change "ADVISING" to "REMINDING". I'll have to think over the rest of it, but I'm willing to give tentative approval.