[Groot Gouda]

Right to Learn about Evolution

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights


Strength: Significant


Proposed by: Saint Lucius Malfoy

Description: REGRETTING the threat to human rights which is the suppression of learning about evolutionary theory;

AWARE that some of causes of this suppression are political and/or religious based fears that evolution is an alternative to belief in a deity;

NOTING that many religions do not feel threatened by evolutionary theory. Furthermore it is unlikely that God is so malevolent as to plant evidence that our planet is aged 3.5 billion years;

EMPHASIZING the United Nations must collectively discourage the suppression of this grand unifying theme called evolutionary theory. Teachers of the idea should also be free from imprisonment and persecution.

CLARIFIES it is not the intention of this proposal to enforce a curriculum upon nations which have varied cultural and societal tastes. Specifically a nation may decide to not include evolutionary theory in the classroom because a lack of interest by teachers and/or students. This will not be interpreted by the UN as evidence of suppression. Suppression is defined as written laws preventing the teaching of evolutionary theory or punishing those who teach it.

MANDATES a strong symbolical disapproval against any member state that persists to physically imprison / punish teachers or students for engaging in evolutionary studies.

REITERATES the need for member nations to allow students to learn about evolutionary theory;

ASKS member nations work with world leaders to prevent the suppression of evolutionary theory in the classroom.



Voting Ends: Sun May 8 2005

Groot Gouda's position: AGAINST

[Groot Gouda]

As you can see, my personal position is Against.

The reasons:
- this resolution is not just infringing on national sovereignity without good reason, it even goes straight to the curriculum. No reason is given for regulation over such details.
- this resolution doesn't prevent from teaching that the theory of evolution is wrong
- this resolution deepens the gap between religious and non-religious states

But mainly: I can't see any reason why a specific theory (and that's a theory, mind you, not The Truth, despite the fact that it is a good theory) should be singled out for "protection" (but it isn't even protected very well).

My take: vote against this, and support attempts to create resolutions protecting science in general. That is the position I have defended in the draft stage of this proposal in the forums, and the position I think suits our region's values most.

But correct me if I'm wrong, of course. And, considering the elections, I'd like to invite the honourable Scoopy to state his position on this resolution, and what he'd have done in my place.

[Yuunli]

Fellow members of the International Democratic Union,

In an official statement to the United Nations Forum, the Yuunli government has already stated their arguments against this proposal.

Religious groups have no influence whatsoever on politics in the Republic of Yuunli. Our citizens are free to believe in deities, but the curricula of our schools do not encourage children to have such faith.

Basic knowledge about evolution theory is a part of the "education standards" in the field of biology. The provinces of Yuunli are required to teach at least what is written in those standards; everything else is up to them. This is to assure the comparability of school degrees across the country, and to give children some basic knowledge they need in life.

We do not, however, consider learning about evolutionary theory a human right. It is simply knowledge we consider worth knowing, in the same way as we consider basic geometry worth knowing.

In our opinion, teachers should always be free from imprisonment and persecution, no matter what they teach.

Kizzy Renito (Free Citizens Party)
Councilor for Education
The Republic of Yuunli


PS @Groot Gouda:
Why did you, as the UN delegate of the IDU, vote against the resolution if this has not yet been discussed by the IDU members?

[Groot Gouda]

YuunliMay 4 2005, 01:02 PM PS @Groot Gouda:
Why did you, as the UN delegate of the IDU, vote against the resolution if this has not yet been discussed by the IDU members? [/quote]
Because personally, I am against this resolution. As you know, a vote can be changed at any time, so if the region wants me to vote otherwise I will.

[Keeslandia]

While the majority of the citizens of the Empire support the idea behind this resolution, we can not as a government endorse it. The tone is snide, snippy and condescending. It fails to recognize there can be legitimate differences of opinion and fails to respect those differences.

Therefore, while the public schools in the Empire of Keeslandia will continue to boldly teach Darwinian evolution, we will not support this resolution and will be abstaining from voting on this measure.

[Mikitivity]

My government actually shares Keeslandia's concerns. At present we are undecided and are looking to the UN forum debate to sway us one way or another.

[Scoopy]

MikitivityMay 4 2005, 04:47 PM My government actually shares Keeslandia's concerns. At present we are undecided and are looking to the UN forum debate to sway us one way or another. [/quote]
I will give you my view on the resolution``right to learn about evolution``. As Keeslandia posted on May 4 2005, 02:39 PM that resolution failed to recognise the legitimate differences between people believing the evolution theory and others that done. I agree on that.
Personally, I am a believer who think that the earth was created by God, and that contrast with the evolution theory. My citizens are divided on this matter, because we promote the freedom to choose what ever you want to believe.

Another point that made this resolution difficult to vote for is the shortcoming of it. Teachers should only teach what have been discussed to be taught in classes. And so the fore a teacher can't be imprison or persecuted.

I personally like the idea that states that this resolution should allowed students to learn about evolutionary theory. That is why we need both public and private schools in our union.
So therefore I am going to vote it because everybody should be able to learn both stories. Why if that weren?t the case, we would have still believe that the earth was flat, because the church said it.

I know it is difficult Groot Gouda and I really appreciate your open mind and your opinion on this matter. Only I think you should send all the UN members in the region a message to get their view on that or wait until Sunday and cash the majority vote of the union.
Scoopy

[Grosseschnauzer]

What I've concluded simply is that this proposal is not appropriate for the NSUN, and have voted against.

It's not that we don't agree with the sentiment, it IS that we don't see how this is an international issue or one that isn't alrwady covered by resolution guaranteeing human rights, including the right to an education.

[Domnonia]

We remain amazed that not only is this proposal headed towards ratification, but that it will be ratified by such a large margin. It is easy to wonder whether proposals are ever read past the Title.

[Mikitivity]

DomnoniaMay 5 2005, 03:19 PM We remain amazed that not only is this proposal headed towards ratification, but that it will be ratified by such a large margin. It is easy to wonder whether proposals are ever read past the Title. [/quote]
I actually have reason to believe other nations are actually reading the first few lines of the resolution.

The comments I read on one other forum can be summarized as follows:

This steps on national sovereignty, is not well written, but we don't like fundamentalists ... and therefore feel the better course of action is to vote for.

My government actually was debating the same thing. There is no clear cut position for Mikitivity, thus we've decided to either abstain or vote with the majority of the IDU (our vote will be cast late tonight).

When I was reading the debate for Gouda's Natural Disaster Act and Grosseschnauzer's Tsunami Warning System resolutions, I didn't see the same type of arguements being presented. For those resolutions, it was clear that nations were reading and liked what they saw.


What implications does that have for us as a UN active region? First, I am going to recommend that we put our flowerest comments in the first few lines. I honestly believe nations are reading this far.

Second, I've always believed that human rights arguements are appreciated in the UN, and this resolution seems to agree with that. With that in mind, I'd recommend nations that have never written a resolution before *consider* this category as a good starting place.

[Groot Gouda]

For us as a bunch of resolution writers it doesn't really change anything. As long as we write good proposals, they always seem to get there.