[GA - DEFEATED] Repeal: "LGBTIQA+ Inclusiveness In Schools Act"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hulldom

Hulldom

Winter Kingdom
-
Pronouns
He/Him/His
TNP Nation
Boston Castle
Discord
seathestarlesssky
ga.jpg

Repeal: "LGBTIQA+ Inclusiveness In Schools Act"
Category: Repeal | GA #603
Proposed by: Wallenburg | Onsite Topic
Replacement: None​

General Assembly Resolution #603 “LGBTIQA Inclusiveness in Schools Act” (Category: Education and Creativity; Area of Effect: Educational) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Recognizing the capacity of international legislation to establish in law the rights of gender and sexual minorities, such as through GAR #91 "A Convention on Gender", GAR #457 "Defending The Rights Of Sexual And Gender Minorities", GAR #467 "Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy", GAR #542 "Gay Panic Defense Ban", GAR #559 "End Conversion Therapy", GAR #571 "Access to Transgender Hormone Therapy", GAR #578 "Transgender Self-Determination", and many other resolutions which do so as a secondary matter or as part of broader anti-discrimination law,

Regretting the unfortunate side effects of overlooked flaws within the target's text,

The World Assembly hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution #603, LGBTIQA Inclusiveness In Schools Act, for the following causes:
  1. The target requires all schools to give their students a broad suite of educational, health, and counseling resources.
    1. Specialized institutions, such as youth performing arts groups, martial arts and military academies, culinary schools, online coding academies, educational tour programs, and junior sports leagues, are each required to implement an educational unit concerning sexual and romantic orientation and gender identity and provide ongoing supporting resources. In total, these requirements may partially or entirely eclipse the specialized function of these institutions, preventing them from serving their primary educational goal and, in many cases, rendering their operations financially untenable as they must fulfill the dual roles of education and gender and sexuality counseling.
    2. Those member states which commonly use distinct institutions for various degrees of childhood education—preschool, primary, secondary, and postsecondary education, for example—must provide redundant education and counseling on matters of sexual and romantic orientation and gender identity, regardless of any utility—or lack thereof—repeated educational material may have.
  2. The target falls back on language often made to excuse the perceived abnormality of gender and sexual minorities, such as the idea that these factors are "beyond their conscious control" or are "natural".
    1. These arguments lack concrete scientific merit across the breadth of World Assembly member states.
    2. This assumes that the morality of gender or sexual characteristics is dependent on their natural status or the inability of an individual to alter these characteristics. It justifies anti-hate law on the basis that individuals belonging to gender or sexual minorities cannot help but belong to those categories, rather than on the basis that hate toward gender and sexual minorities causes undue harm and creates an unsafe and uncivil society. Proper anti-hate law does not buy into the thought processes of the bigots it stands against.
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

ForAgainstAbstainPresent
6815
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IFV - Please upvote the dispatch!
Overview This proposal seeks to repeal GAR#603 "LGBTIQA+ Inclusiveness In Schools Act" with two main thrusts. The first the author provides is the overly broad definition of "school" provided, noting that specialist academies are required under the title of law to provide education on LGBTIQA+ identities--something the author charges is already the case. Second, the author charges that the target resolution explicitly makes the assumption that LGBTIQA+ identities are biologically abnormal, and thus discrimination on those grounds is without merit--rather than the simple argument that any discrimination, regardless of reason, is without merit.

Recommendation
We have three main quibbles with this legislation:
  1. No good replacement of this law exists. While we would be perfectly content to recommend a vote for this repeal should an acceptable replacement exist, none such does, and we prefer an imperfect law remain on the books than go through another seemingly never-ending set of repeals and replacements.
  2. We are concerned about the verbiage of 2(b) which, while well-intentioned, has given license to homophobes and transphobes to come out full-throated for this resolution.
  3. While perhaps lacking in significance to some, the inclusion of "romantic orientation" is a topic that has not been touched on in GA law before. In its uniqueness, and that it has not been touched on by the General Assembly before, we believe that its inclusion here to be important enough that this resolution ought not be repealed until anti-discrimination law covers the topic of "romantic orientation" as well.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote Against the General Assembly Resolution at vote, "Repeal: 'LGBTIQA+ Inclusiveness In Schools Act'".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Against.

Between the lack of a replacement, the support for the repeal of trans and homophobic posters in the repeal topic and the attitude of the author, there's nothing here to support.
 
St George:
Against.

Between the lack of a replacement, the support for the repeal of trans and homophobic posters in the repeal topic and the attitude of the author, there's nothing here to support.
Click to expand...
Echoing this. Against.
 
St George:
Against.

Between the lack of a replacement, the support for the repeal of trans and homophobic posters in the repeal topic and the attitude of the author, there's nothing here to support.
Click to expand...
I understand that sentiment, but we’ve been doing these threads a long time and this ministry in particular has made an effort to deal with resolutions on their merits, and very carefully judged them on their author. I would like to see that continue, and I feel the merits stand on firmer ground in this case than the tangential factors you cited here. This is why I will maintain my support for this resolution.

I figured a replacement would be a necessary prerequisite for this repeal to be successful. I would also like to see one. I feel the arguments here indicate that repeal is more beneficial than waiting for a replacement, because as many people along the way felt at the time it was presented, it was flawed and incompletely formulated. We’re going to see resolutions like the target pass easily in this assembly. Most people get it, most people value these things and will do the right thing. But if we know we’re going to win that battle, then it’s even more important for us to get the resolution right. These things are hard to repeal for the same reason, so we have to hold the repeal to a high standard and make sure that what it is actually saying is given a fair hearing.
 
Pallaith:
I understand that sentiment, but we’ve been doing these threads a long time and this ministry in particular has made an effort to deal with resolutions on their merits, and very carefully judged them on their author. I would like to see that continue, and I feel the merits stand on firmer ground in this case than the tangential factors you cited here. This is why I will maintain my support for this resolution.

I figured a replacement would be a necessary prerequisite for this repeal to be successful. I would also like to see one. I feel the arguments here indicate that repeal is more beneficial than waiting for a replacement, because as many people along the way felt at the time it was presented, it was flawed and incompletely formulated. We’re going to see resolutions like the target pass easily in this assembly. Most people get it, most people value these things and will do the right thing. But if we know we’re going to win that battle, then it’s even more important for us to get the resolution right. These things are hard to repeal for the same reason, so we have to hold the repeal to a high standard and make sure that what it is actually saying is given a fair hearing.
Click to expand...
Normally I'd agree, but in this instance, no.
 
Against

Reasons: The author’s only supports are the twisting of clauses and words within the target resolution that falsify the actual intentions of the resolution and only serve to cast a dark shadow on behalf of the author. My main concerns lie within Clause 1A and Clause 2.

Clause 1A: “Specialized institutions, such as youth performing arts groups, martial arts and military academies, culinary schools, online coding academies, educational tour programs, and junior sports leagues, are each required to implement an educational unit concerning sexual and romantic orientation and gender identity and provide ongoing supporting resources. In total, these requirements may partially or entirely eclipse the specialized function of these institutions, preventing them from serving their primary educational goal and, in many cases, rendering their operations financially untenable as they must fulfill the dual roles of education and gender and sexuality counseling.” My main concern about this clause is that it makes it seem that the author prizes the primary functions of institutions over promoting LGBT rights, which I cannot condone.

Clause 2: “The target falls back on language often made to excuse the perceived abnormality of gender and sexual minorities, such as the idea that these factors are "beyond their conscious control" or are "natural".
  1. These arguments lack concrete scientific merit across the breadth of World Assembly member states.
  2. This assumes that the morality of gender or sexual characteristics is dependent on their natural status or the inability of an individual to alter these characteristics. It justifies anti-hate law on the basis that individuals belonging to gender or sexual minorities cannot help but belong to those categories, rather than on the basis that hate toward gender and sexual minorities causes undue harm and creates an unsafe and uncivil society. Proper anti-hate law does not buy into the thought processes of the bigots it stands against.”
From what I see, Clause 2 completely twists the definition of “natural” and “beyond their conscious control” in the context of the target resolution. These words mean that it’s okay for people to identify as LGBT, and do not mean that people are dependent on being LGBT.

Therefore, given the blatant untruthful nature of this repeal and the author’s incorrect tone and word-twisting usage, I must vote against this repeal.
 
This proposal has received the necessary approvals to enter the formal queue. Barring it being withdrawn or marked illegal, it will proceed to a vote at Major Update on Saturday, April 2.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top