WA Resolution: Sentients Rights Act

[MinnaCaroline]

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Acknowledging that the recognition of the rights of sapients under international law remains a contentious issue within these halls;

Applauding the efforts of nations to extend essential rights and freedoms to non-human sapients in their own territories, and to lobby on behalf of non-human sapients on the global stage;

Affirming that all sapient creatures deserve the same rights and freedoms extended to humans, and that all sentient beings are deserving of protection under international law;

Noting that this legislation applies only to natural biological sapient species:

Defines "sapience" as independent capacity for wisdom, judgment, the formation of rational, abstract or logical thoughts, and the ability to communicate these thoughts with others;

Defines "sentience" as the ability to perceive consciousness or self-awareness, an intelligence that does not necessarily rise to the level of sapience;

Declares that member nations shall determine which biological species residing in their own borders possess sentient or sapient qualities, provided that the process involved is fair and even-handed and excludes potential conflicts of interest, that all available valid and confirmed scientific evidence is taken into account, and that denials of sentient or sapient status can be appealed to a higher, disinterested official or body within the government;

Requires member states to extend rights, freedoms, privileges and entitlements, on a par with those guaranteed to humans under international law, to all sapient species under their jurisdiction;

Obligates member states to take all prudent and necessary measures to protect all sentient creatures under their jurisdiction from deliberate, unprovoked harm, violence, killings, or extermination.

Voting Ends August 6, 2008

[MinnaCaroline]

I am in favor of this resolution because it is giving everyone equal rights regardless of whether or not they are an alien or non human life form.

Please vote and if you think I'm completely wrong, tell me why so we can decide together what the best vote should be.

[Shelter From The Storm]

Hmm... Let's say that there were vampires and werewolves. Would you want to give them equal rights?

[Estayland]

I would like to know how you consider "Delegate's Perogative" in your voting. Do you add those votes to the votes of your choice, or do you consider it a whole-'nother (that's a Southern term, ya'll) vote? As in, as of now, there are 2 Delegate's Perogative votes. Do you add those to the "For" tally?

[MinnaCaroline]

I take the delegate's perogative to mean they want me to vote the way I choose to vote. And yes, I took as a For because that's the way I voted.

I see there are now quite a few more against this resolution and so far only one person who isn't even part of the WA has voiced their opinion.

Does anyone else have anything else to say on the matter?

Actually yes, I would give vampires and werewolves the same rights as humans.

[MinnaCaroline]

This resolution is now closed

The resolution "Sentients Rights Act" was defeated 4,671 votes to 3,720.

[Estayland]

I voted against this because it basically gives animals more rights than unborn babies.

Minna, do you mean to say the vote was 6-3 against/for or 6-2-1 against/DP/for? When I was delegate, if the "delegate's perogative" vote won, I voted the way I wanted. I did not add it to the side. I guess that's what I'm asking.

[MinnaCaroline]

Yes, I mean to say the vote was 6-3 but this morning when I voted the vote was 3-3, 1 "for" 3 "against" and 2 delegate's prerogative.

This is what I'm going to do, I will post the resolution and I will post the way I'm going to vote, if you don't agree with me please post why you disagree and we have a discussion, I am totally open to changing my mind especially when you make a good point. But if you're (and I'm not saying you Estay, I'm say "you" People in general) going to vote against and not voice your opinion why I'm going to go with what I think is the best.

I focused on this line in the proposal "Defines "sapience" as independent capacity for wisdom, judgment, the formation of rational, abstract or logical thoughts, and the ability to communicate these thoughts with others" to me that does not sound like an animal.

So lets discuss the next one if we disagree, I love to hear reasons why people vote the way they do and like I said I'm totally open to changing my mind... I do it quite often!

[Estayland]

I guess I misread it, but I still don't like the idea of giving rights to "vampires" if there are such things.

[MinnaCaroline]

No, actually you were right. I was wrong Estay. After I got to re-reading it the act is for Satients but in the actual resolution they define Sapience and Satience. Which isn't even Satients. Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. lol!

I thought they were talking rights for all Sapience. That's why I voted the way I did. I would have voted against for Satients. Whew what a mix up. My apologies!!

[Enigmatic]

Aug 6, 2008 21:10:22 GMT -5 Estayland said:

I guess I misread it, but I still don't like the idea of giving rights to "vampires" if there are such things.

Don't let Crochet hear you say that.

[Shelter From The Storm]

Aug 6, 2008 16:08:26 GMT -5 MinnaCaroline said:

I see there are now quite a few more against this resolution and so far only one person who isn't even part of the WA has voiced their opinion.

I know it says I am not a WA member here, but actually, I am.

[Shelter From The Storm]

So now the WA wants me to stop putting our nomadic populations in camps, which is where they belong! How are we supposed to provide basic education and social services to those nomads if they won't stay in one place?

[Twobagger]

Camps are kind of tacky.
I prefer gulags.