[Defeated] Commend Gay

[The Atlae Isles]

Nay.

[Transdavisia]

Why the hell has this not been proposed yet? Aye.

[Wymondham]

Nay

[Wymondham]

Oops double post

[Adytus]

Cormac sent this to everyone today.

Spoiler

Hey there, Adytus!
I'm writing to ask you to vote AGAINST the Security Council proposal currently at vote, Commend Gay.
This proposal spends a lot of time applauding Gay's commitment to the LGBTQ+ community and its commitment to NationStates defender groups, but what the proposal's author has neglected to mention is that Gay has a long history of prioritizing gameplay over commitment to the LGBTQ+ community of NationStates. As you will see in the Constitution of the Region of Gay, discrimination against LGBTQ+ NationStates players based on their gameplay alignment is enshrined in Gay's constitution. This includes:
Allowing the Founder to eject and ban LGBTQ+ raiders who want to participate in the community [Article 1, Section 7A(2)];
Prohibiting LGBTQ+ raiders from serving in most governmental offices in Gay [Article 1, Section 14B];
Prohibiting former LGBTQ+ raiders from serving as WA Delegate or Supreme Court Justice [Article 1, Section 14C(1)];
Including raider regions -- many of which are LGBTQ+ friendly -- in the list of regions incompatible for sharing an embassy with Gay, alongside homophobes, fascists, and Nazis [Article 1, Section 11D(3)].
You may be asking, "Isn't this just common sense for a region to protect itself?" It might be, if Gay were a region without an active Founder. However, Gay has an active Founder, which makes the region immune to raiding. Gay's policies toward raiders are just exclusion for the sake of exclusion and have nothing to do with protection of their region. Their inclusion of raiders alongside homophobes, fascists, and Nazis is particularly odious. There exists a range of diverse views on raiding among NationStates players, but we should all be able to agree that an LGBTQ+ region that is committed to advocating for LGBTQ+ people in NationStates and that is supposedly committed to providing a sanctuary for LGBTQ+ players should, when possible, be open to all LGBTQ+ players. Gay has instead decided to prioritize gameplay discrimination over its commitment to LGBTQ+ players, and a region that has deliberately and needlessly excluded LGBTQ+ players should not be commended for its commitment to the LGBTQ+ community of NationStates.
You may soon hear from The Stalker or from someone else defending Gay's abysmal record of excluding LGBTQ+ players. One frequent argument put forward in defense of Gay is that Gay is considering rescinding the policies that exclude LGBTQ+ players. Please don't buy into that argument. We've been told since January 2016, during a defeated attempt to commend BearNation, that Gay was considering rescinding its exclusionary policies. You can view this post on the NationStates forum if you want to verify that. It's nearly September 2017 now and the changes to Gay's constitution haven't materialized. Gay certainly should change these exclusionary policies, but it should only be considered for commendation after such policies have been changed -- and not a moment sooner.
I hope you'll agree with me, Adytus, that an LGBTQ+ region shouldn't be deliberately and needlessly excluding LGBTQ+ players and definitely shouldn't be commended while doing so. I hope you'll cast your vote AGAINST Commend Gay.

[Adytus]

Nay

[Cormac]

Emphatically and unsurprisingly Nay.

[Kowassati]

Nay