[GA] At Vote: Repeal: "Right to a Legal Divorce" [Complete]

Separatist Peoples

Separatist Peoples

TNPer
Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #39: The Right to a Lawful Divorce (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Recognizing that GAR #39, "The Right to a Lawful Divorce", permits a party to a marriage to terminate the marriage for any reason whatsoever,

Strongly affirming the right to divorce for cause, such as infidelity, domestic violence, or abandonment,

Nonetheless emphasizing that it has been conclusively established that most marriages result in children and that divorce often causes significant harm to the welfare of such children,

Acknowledging that World Assembly member states therefore have a legitimate interest in reducing divorce rates and in regulating divorce in order to achieve this aim,

Observing that it may be appropriate, for instance, for member states to require marriage counselling or six months' separation prior to granting a divorce in certain circumstances, and that such requirements should not be considered a significant infringement on the individual rights of the parties to the marriage,

Concerned that such policies are not permitted under the target resolution, which requires that divorce be made available "without let or hindrance",

Supportive of a resolution establishing a right to divorce in somewhat more limited circumstances,

The General Assembly,

Repeals GAR #39, "The Right to a Lawful Divorce".
Click to expand...

For, Against, Abstain
 
Ministry Determination
Vote Recommendation: AGAINST
While the removal of legislation that unnecessarily impedes into purely domestic purviews is always a good thing, this proposal has more than a few issues. This, for example:

Nonetheless emphasizing that it has been conclusively established that most marriages result in children and that divorce often causes significant harm to the welfare of such children,

Is entirely unsubstantiated. There is plenty of reasoning to conclude that divorce is, in many circumstances, beneficial to children, as it takes them out of a house where their parents are continuously fighting. That this argument makes a bold leap into guessland, and knowing the author’s biased opinions on the topic, this seems like yet another example of blatant dishonesty in a repeal.

Such a central argument to the repeal being so questionable, it seems in the best interest to send this back to the drafting board until a stronger argument can be made. Additionally, there is a very real concern that such a repeal would open the door to significant abuses of their citizenry through draconian reversals upon the repeal.

Therefore, it is the Ministry’s opinion that it is in the best interest of The North Pacific and her citizens to vote AGAINST.
 
Separatist Peoples:
Is entirely unsubstantiated. There is plenty of reasoning to conclude that divorce is, in many circumstances, beneficial to children, as it takes them out of a house where their parents are continuously fighting. That this argument makes a bold leap into guessland, and knowing the author’s biased opinions on the topic, this seems like yet another example of blatant dishonesty in a repeal.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I can't really cite real-life studies in a repeal, can I?

The reality is that children are ultimately better off with two loving parents rather than with just one. And while that isn't always possible, I think it's reasonable for the state to encourage couples to try to work their issues out before divorcing, such that they might become a loving family again.
 
Tally: 6 Against, 1 For. My vote is lodged as Against. Feel free to vote if you have not done so. The more votes, the stronger our WA Ministry is :)

~ Tomb
 
Auralia:
Separatist Peoples:
Is entirely unsubstantiated. There is plenty of reasoning to conclude that divorce is, in many circumstances, beneficial to children, as it takes them out of a house where their parents are continuously fighting. That this argument makes a bold leap into guessland, and knowing the author’s biased opinions on the topic, this seems like yet another example of blatant dishonesty in a repeal.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I can't really cite real-life studies in a repeal, can I?

The reality is that children are ultimately better off with two loving parents rather than with just one. And while that isn't always possible, I think it's reasonable for the state to encourage couples to try to work their issues out before divorcing, such that they might become a loving family again.
Click to expand...
The funny thing is that I'd personally support a repeal that focused on the legalistic issues and less on emotional issues. CD's repeal is infinitely more attractive in that regard.

The needs of the children cannot be ignored, but the needs of the parents are just as important. Not all problems can be fixed. People change, and their needs with them. Forcing them to go to counseling could just prolong the issue.

You want to fix the issues of children in single-parent homes? The solution isn't to prevent the parents from splitting up, the solution is to make that inevitable split as clean as possible, and provide support to those families that suffer financial difficulties as a result, be it through government support or child support as a stipulation to the divorce.
 
I will have to disagree, because if two people can not end their relationship by getting a divorce then it could possibly turn into a situation that is violent and that would be worst than getting a divorce.
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top