[PASSED] Reproductive Freedoms

[Aligned Planets]

And now 2 approvals left. Me thinks that there's a counter campaign on-going. *wonders what the text of said TG says*

Three now.

I guess it must be an Auralian job. His proposal failed the mod-check earlier today, after all.

Indeed - I received the telegram; usual point of it being a state issue rather than a federal issue.

[Auralia]

"Yes!" Rowan's jubilant cry fills the chamber as she grabs Alex's hands and dances around in a circle, the diminutive Epiſkœ arcing between and around them, showering the excited girls with shimmering pixie dust. "We made quorum!" the two sing in unison, "We made quorum! We made quorum!"

Hmm, it does seem that the celebration was a tad premature...

[Elke and Elba]

Three now.

I guess it must be an Auralian job. His proposal failed the mod-check earlier today, after all.

Indeed - I received the telegram; usual point of it being a state issue rather than a federal issue.

Says the person who wants to introduce a blocker and try to impose his Christian views on us, amongst others?

[Unibot III]

"Yes!" Rowan's jubilant cry fills the chamber as she grabs Alex's hands and dances around in a circle, the diminutive Epiſkœ arcing between and around them, showering the excited girls with shimmering pixie dust. "We made quorum!" the two sing in unison, "We made quorum! We made quorum!"

OOC: Absolutely adorable.

[Aligned Planets]

Indeed - I received the telegram; usual point of it being a state issue rather than a federal issue.

Says the person who wants to introduce a blocker and try to impose his Christian views on us, amongst others?

??

[Elke and Elba]

Says the person who wants to introduce a blocker and try to impose his Christian views on us, amongst others?

??

OOC: Not you, I'm talking about Auralia. I find it hilarious he actually wrote that as a reason in his telegram XD

[Auralia]

Says the person who wants to introduce a blocker and try to impose his Christian views on us, amongst others?

So by allowing you and other member nations to determine independently whether or not to legalize abortion, I am "impos[ing] my Christian views" on you?

[Aligned Planets]

Haha I was very confused!

[Elke and Elba]

Says the person who wants to introduce a blocker and try to impose his Christian views on us, amongst others?

So by allowing you and other member nations to determine independently whether or not to legalize abortion, I am "impos[ing] my Christian views" on you?

Err, no. You misinterpreted. However, do you not dare claim that many of your (other) proposals have your Christian slants in them?

[Auralia]

So by allowing you and other member nations to determine independently whether or not to legalize abortion, I am "impos[ing] my Christian views" on you?

Err, no. You misinterpreted. However, do you not dare claim that many of your (other) proposals have your Christian slants in them?

None of my proposals have ever forced an exclusively Christian view on others, no. However, I think this is turning into a threadjack, so we should take this to TG.

[Elke and Elba]

Err, no. You misinterpreted. However, do you not dare claim that many of your (other) proposals have your Christian slants in them?

None of my proposals have ever forced an exclusively Christian view on others, no. However, I think this is turning into a threadjack, so we should take this to TG.

I disagree. This is imperative in understanding why would anyone in the right mind actually organise a counter-campaign against a simple harmless proposal that will be rather none-of-your-business.

[Auralia]

None of my proposals have ever forced an exclusively Christian view on others, no. However, I think this is turning into a threadjack, so we should take this to TG.

I disagree. This is imperative in understanding why would anyone in the right mind actually organise a counter-campaign against a simple harmless proposal that will be rather none-of-your-business.

The proposal in question is not harmless. It forces an extreme view on the legality of abortion on all member states in the World Assembly.

[Mousebumples]

I disagree. This is imperative in understanding why would anyone in the right mind actually organise a counter-campaign against a simple harmless proposal that will be rather none-of-your-business.

The proposal in question is not harmless. It forces an extreme view on the legality of abortion on all member states in the World Assembly.

Yes. And why shouldn't women in all member states be afforded these rights and protections? The WA has seen fit to protect the rights of homosexuals (gay marriage), transsexuals, among others. Why not women and their reproductive rights?

Oh, right. Blahblahblah it's immoral. Or something like that.

EDIT: And, to be honest, on some levels, I'm glad that EF will (likely) get the opportunity to resubmit. With some help from their WAD (*points at self*), a full campaign can be run that will hopefully make the merits of passing this resolution clear to all WADs ... and not just those that they were able to manually TG.

[Elke and Elba]

I disagree. This is imperative in understanding why would anyone in the right mind actually organise a counter-campaign against a simple harmless proposal that will be rather none-of-your-business.

The proposal in question is not harmless. It forces an extreme view on the legality of abortion on all member states in the World Assembly.

As much as it may "force an extreme view on the legality of abortion" - why don't you just leave a damn woman alone?

This only gives people a choice. Why should religious fanatics like you have a say over secular woman? If the woman is a devout Catholic or Christian, heck, she'll take the last option - adoption, if she /really/ doesn't want it!

It doesn't concern you at all, period.

[Auralia]

Yes. And why shouldn't women in all member states be afforded these rights and protections? The WA has seen fit to protect the rights of homosexuals (gay marriage), transsexuals, among others. Why not women and their reproductive rights?

Gay rights and transsexual rights are not at all related to abortion rights, and it is disingenuous to suggest otherwise. ((OOC: Ever heard of the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians?))

This only gives people a choice.

I don't believe that people should have the choice to kill their child, and I don't think you do either. The underlying issue is whether or not a fetus is a human being, not whether the state should intervene to prevent homicides.

[Elke and Elba]

Yes. And why shouldn't women in all member states be afforded these rights and protections? The WA has seen fit to protect the rights of homosexuals (gay marriage), transsexuals, among others. Why not women and their reproductive rights?

Gay rights and transsexual rights are not at all related to abortion rights, and it is disingenuous to suggest otherwise. ((OOC: Ever heard of the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians?))

IQ Test: Gay rights, transsexual rights, abortion rights, orange. Which is obviously not in the same category?

As for PLAGAL - that's a real threadjack. It does not answer any point at all and is tangential to the topic. Also - they can breed each other like rabbits but they won't get pregnant. Obviously being a pro-lifer is an easy job.

Just like for yourself.

To Mousey: the difference is two days or two weeks. I don't want EF to wait so long just because of one devout Catholic's sabotage. (Always thought the Bible would disallow that or something like that. It's benevolent in nature, after all.)

[Auralia]

IQ Test: Gay rights, transsexual rights, abortion rights, orange. Which is obviously not in the same category?

That's disingenuous. Sure, gay rights, transsexual rights and abortion rights are all asserted rights. So are fetal rights, for that matter. The question is whether one should support abortion rights as a direct result of supporting gay rights, which is what Mousebumples was claiming. The obvious answer is no: a woman's right to bodily sovereignty is very different from a gay person's right to have their sexual orientation recognized and respected by law.

As for PLAGAL - that's a real threadjack. It does not answer any point at all and is tangential to the topic.

No, it is very relevant to this topic. It demonstrates that you can be gay and pro-life, which in turn means that gay rights have absolutely nothing to do with abortion rights.

To Mousey: the difference is two days or two weeks. I don't want EF to wait so long just because of one devout Catholic's sabotage. (Always thought the Bible would disallow that or something like that. It's benevolent in nature, after all.)

You know, my opposition to abortion ultimately has little to do with my Catholic faith. I have only used secular arguments when debating abortion in these halls, and so I would appreciate it if you would stop implying that my religion is the primary source of my opposition to this proposal.

[Christian Democrats]

Why not women and their reproductive rights?

This proposal does not aim to protect a "right to reproduce."

[Hirota]

My government is disappointed this looks like it's not going to reach quorum this time round after getting so close (especially with the delegation from Eireann Fae going old school and writing the telegrams the hard way). But it's hardly the first time defeat has been snatched from the jaws of victory when it comes to this ongoing abortion discussion, and I'm sure we'll some more twists and turns over time. It's all jolly entertaining!

E&E - gotta say I can't recall seeing Auralia using their faith as justification for arguing their position for a very long time.

[the Imperial Crown]

"Yes!" Rowan's jubilant cry fills the chamber as she grabs Alex's hands and dances around in a circle, the diminutive Epiſkœ arcing between and around them, showering the excited girls with shimmering pixie dust. "We made quorum!" the two sing in unison, "We made quorum! We made quorum!"

Hmm, it does seem that the celebration was a tad premature...

There's been a lengthy discussion on whether you have been TG'ing people regarding this proposal in Osiris' IRC channel. I went to approve it after I saw it was dropping in support which was funny considering it was in quorum originally.

I sense something distasteful has been going on. My WA minister isn't best pleased and I find myself wanting to scrutinise future campaigning by Auralia more closely.

[Christian Democrats]

The proposal has died, falling one approval short of quorum.

I would like to take credit for getting one delegate to withdraw his approval ten minutes before the deadline.

[Elke and Elba]

The proposal has died, falling one approval short of quorum.

I would like to take credit for getting one delegate to withdraw his approval ten minutes before the deadline.

For now.

It'll always be back up - now EF with the help of Mousey too.

I think I know who the delegate is.

[Auralia]

I sense something distasteful has been going on. My WA minister isn't best pleased and I find myself wanting to scrutinise future campaigning by Auralia more closely.

I freely admit that I conducted a counter-campaign against this proposal. There's nothing wrong about that.

[Christian Democrats]

I think I know who the delegate is.

Who would that be?

[Bananaistan]

If EF, E and E and Mousey are going to campaign for this resolution if reintroduced, I will offer any assistance I can give.