[DEFEATED] Repeal of Reproductive Freedoms

[Dobrobyt]

Mr. Fairburn, if you can realize this, new nations come in every day, with differing beliefs, so, there can always be another attempt and this may be won with a different demographic.

New nations do come in but the delegates who control a large portion of the vote in the Assembly don't change so much, this repeal will fail like many before it, the demographics having changed that much and the Assembly still leans left a great deal.

Then we shall keep on fighting.

[Bears Armed]

"If a hitchhiker refuses to leave your car, their refusal is itself a trespass."

"even if you had agreed to carry them through, and now wish to dump them in, an area where they could not survive outside the car?!"

"At any rate, a hitchhiker doesn't present s violation of bodily sovereignty in your example."

"I wasn't the person who started the body/car comparison..."

Urrna Silvertrees,
Apprentice Voice, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.

[States of Glory WA Office]

Mr. Fairburn

Fairburn: Ambassador Fairburn.

[Dobrobyt]

"If a hitchhiker refuses to leave your car, their refusal is itself a trespass."

"even if you had agreed to carry them through, and now wish to dump them in, an area where they could not survive outside the car?!"

"At any rate, a hitchhiker doesn't present s violation of bodily sovereignty in your example."

"I wasn't the person who started the body/car comparison..."

Urrna Silvertrees,
Apprentice Voice, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.

Could you please contribute to this discussion? This is really something minor and unnecessary.

[WA Kitty Kops]

About me, I *hopefully* am a future father, and in that case, I would never have a wife who would abort a baby out of pure irresponsibility and carelessness.

OOC: Opposed because of this.

The "carelessness" is usually on the man's side, but accidents happen (even when contraceptives are used, as short of removing the man's testicles, you cannot guarantee semen will not meet the egg). People shouldn't have to pay for an accident for the rest of their life. You don't get a life sentence for accidental manslaughter either.

IC:

Fairburn: All these repeals do is waste paper. Won't someone please think of the trees?

"So you like the green mind after all," a voice commented from under his chair, but its owner was gone by the time anyone could bow down to look. The voice had sounded vaguely feminine.

[Dobrobyt]

About me, I *hopefully* am a future father, and in that case, I would never have a wife who would abort a baby out of pure irresponsibility and carelessness.

OOC: Opposed because of this.

The "carelessness" is usually on the man's side, but accidents happen (even when contraceptives are used, as short of removing the man's testicles, you cannot guarantee semen will not meet the egg). People shouldn't have to pay for an accident for the rest of their life. You don't get a life sentence for accidental manslaughter either.

IC:

Fairburn: All these repeals do is waste paper. Won't someone please think of the trees?

"So you like the green mind after all," a voice commented from under his chair, but its owner was gone by the time anyone could bow down to look. The voice had sounded vaguely feminine.

Accidents? This is a life at hand. For accidental manslaughter, you still get some punishment, by the way, in most countries. Except, here, this "accident" can be easily prevented by a caring person.

[WA Kitty Kops]

Accidents? This is a life at hand. For accidental manslaughter, you still get some punishment, by the way, in most countries. Except, here, this "accident" can be easily prevented by a caring person.

OOC: Easy solution: vasectomy for all boys when they're babies. Artificial insemination only. Can't accidentally get someone pregnant at all. Yet I somehow think that you would think that interfered with your bodily rights. If yes, then you'll understand where I and others come from with our opposition. If not, go get a vasectomy, now.

EDITs because good grief trying to type on this thing!

[Greifenburg]

So, the family in that case should think twice and be responsible.

"Responsibility is one thing, but accidents are still in the possibility, as is negligence. Again, why should the state forbid a woman to control what is happening in her womb because, for example, her husband/boyfriend/whatever was careless. Also there is the possibility of fertilization through deceptive means during a consensual sexual act, which is often not defined as rape."

[Dobrobyt]

Accidents? This is a life at hand. For accidental manslaughter, you still get some punishment, by the way, in most countries. Except, here, this "accident" can be easily prevented by a caring person.

OOC: Easy solution: vasectomy for all boys when they're babies. Artificial insemination only. Can't accidentally get someone pregnant at all. Yet I somehow think that you would think that interfered with your bodily rights. If yes, then you'll understand where I and others come from with our opposition. If not, go get a vasectomy, now.

EDITs because good grief trying to type on this thing!

You could work out those solutions, however, before that, we need to repeal this bill to then get a replacement.

[Dobrobyt]

So, the family in that case should think twice and be responsible.

"Responsibility is one thing, but accidents are still in the possibility, as is negligence. Again, why should the state forbid a woman to control what is happening in her womb because, for example, her husband/boyfriend/whatever was careless. Also there is the possibility of fertilization through deceptive means during a consensual sexual act, which is often not defined as rape."

So you're saying in the case of sex only the man is responsible?

On your second thought, again, those solutions can be worked out after the repeal.

[Chus Kruthe]

OOC: Easy solution: vasectomy for all boys when they're babies. Artificial insemination only. Can't accidentally get someone pregnant at all. Yet I somehow think that you would think that interfered with your bodily rights. If yes, then you'll understand where I and others come from with our opposition. If not, go get a vasectomy, now.

EDITs because good grief trying to type on this thing!

You could work out those solutions, however, before that, we need to repeal this bill to then get a replacement.

But we don't need to repeal this bill, it works for the majority of the nations who support a woman's right to control her own body. The own nations who don't like it are those who desire to strip women of their rights and control their bodies for them while pretending doing so is a moral cause. We need not repeal this bill, it works for pretty much everyone but a small minority of nations.

[Gagium]

The Kingdom of Gagium supports this repeal of Reproductive Freedoms.

[Dobrobyt]

You could work out those solutions, however, before that, we need to repeal this bill to then get a replacement.

But we don't need to repeal this bill, it works for the majority of the nations who support a woman's right to control her own body. The own nations who don't like it are those who desire to strip women of their rights and control their bodies for them while pretending doing so is a moral cause. We need not repeal this bill, it works for pretty much everyone but a small minority of nations.

Well, your "small minority" of nations is actually larger than you think.

Personally, I don't care what nation or state someone was born in, their life and opportunity should be protected by all means. Protecting life, whether that of adults, children, citizens or immigrants should be a priority.

[Gagium]

You could work out those solutions, however, before that, we need to repeal this bill to then get a replacement.

But we don't need to repeal this bill, it works for the majority of the nations who support a woman's right to control her own body. The own nations who don't like it are those who desire to strip women of their rights and control their bodies for them while pretending doing so is a moral cause. We need not repeal this bill, it works for pretty much everyone but a small minority of nations.

Yes, it works for the majority OF the nations who 'support a woman's right to control her own body', but not for the rest of us who think it is wrong to kill an unborn baby who, if aborted, wouldn't even have the chance to live out their lives.

[Dobrobyt]

But we don't need to repeal this bill, it works for the majority of the nations who support a woman's right to control her own body. The own nations who don't like it are those who desire to strip women of their rights and control their bodies for them while pretending doing so is a moral cause. We need not repeal this bill, it works for pretty much everyone but a small minority of nations.

Yes, it works for the majority OF the nations who 'support a woman's right to control her own body', but not for the rest of us who think it is wrong to kill an unborn baby who, if aborted, wouldn't even have the chance to live out their lives.

Thank you for that. That is a major point in why we need a repeal and replacement.

[Chus Kruthe]

But we don't need to repeal this bill, it works for the majority of the nations who support a woman's right to control her own body. The own nations who don't like it are those who desire to strip women of their rights and control their bodies for them while pretending doing so is a moral cause. We need not repeal this bill, it works for pretty much everyone but a small minority of nations.

Yes, it works for the majority OF the nations who 'support a woman's right to control her own body', but not for the rest of us who think it is wrong to kill an unborn baby who, if aborted, wouldn't even have the chance to live out their lives.

Right it might not work for the rest of nations but in an organization like this where we vote it is majority rule, and this works for the majority. That is why repeals of this have been defeated so many times.

[Greifenburg]

So you're saying in the case of sex only the man is responsible?

On your second thought, again, those solutions can be worked out after the repeal.

"Which we will oppose since the argument that, and I quote,"

So, the family in that case should think twice and be responsible.

"isn't overly convincing to deny a woman a choice. That is what the debate is about. Giving her a choice or denying her that choice. If she wants to give birth and set the child then up for adoption, she can do that. If she doesn't, well, then she doesn't. The current legislation doesn't force woman to get an abortion, and it doesn't outlaw the promotion of alternatives."

[Dobrobyt]

So you're saying in the case of sex only the man is responsible?

On your second thought, again, those solutions can be worked out after the repeal.

"Which we will oppose since the argument that, and I quote,"

So, the family in that case should think twice and be responsible.

"isn't overly convincing to deny a woman a choice. That is what the debate is about. Giving her a choice or denying her that choice. If she wants to give birth and set the child then up for adoption, she can do that. If she doesn't, well, then she doesn't. The current legislation doesn't force woman to get an abortion, and it doesn't outlaw the promotion of alternatives."

A choice to prevent a life? That is sickening to many, including myself.

[Gagium]

So you're saying in the case of sex only the man is responsible?

On your second thought, again, those solutions can be worked out after the repeal.

"Which we will oppose since the argument that, and I quote,"

So, the family in that case should think twice and be responsible.

"isn't overly convincing to deny a woman a choice. That is what the debate is about. Giving her a choice or denying her that choice. If she wants to give birth and set the child then up for adoption, she can do that. If she doesn't, well, then she doesn't. The current legislation doesn't force woman to get an abortion, and it doesn't outlaw the promotion of alternatives."

Well, to murder a person is a choice also, but murder's illegal in most, if not all, nations, right..?

[Montchevre]

World Assembly members,
RECOGNIZING that current laws on abortion do not protect the future human lives of newborns in many countries, many of who are victims of lack of responsibility by parents.

REALIZING that the current bill does very little to reduce unnecessary abortions, however that it protects the right to choose in a life-threatening situations or fatal conditions.

SHOCKED that the current bill allows the killing of the living in the womb.

"Because why have civil rights when you can force your religious values on everyone?"
-Senator Ted Cruz, when translated from Bullshitting to English

[Dobrobyt]

World Assembly members,
RECOGNIZING that current laws on abortion do not protect the future human lives of newborns in many countries, many of who are victims of lack of responsibility by parents.

REALIZING that the current bill does very little to reduce unnecessary abortions, however that it protects the right to choose in a life-threatening situations or fatal conditions.

SHOCKED that the current bill allows the killing of the living in the womb.

"Because why have civil rights when you can force your religious values on everyone?"
-Senator Ted Cruz, when translated from Bullshitting to English

Um... can there be some respect here please? This is just utter disgusting, the way you are acting.

Also, religious or not, preventing a new life is WRONG. It just is. If you don't think so, fine, make a law allowing murder throughout your nation and see what happens.

[The Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper]

A choice to prevent a life? That is sickening to many, including myself.

ARI: That's irrelevant. Coffee is sickening to many, including myself. Does that mean we should outlaw coffee? No, we should allow people to drink the beverage of their choice. Can't you see why your argument is not persuasive?

[Chus Kruthe]

I'm done debating this issue, good luck with your repeal. The Reproductive Freedoms resolutions has stood against repeals from far more accomplished delegations and will stand against your repeal as well.

[Montchevre]

"Because why have civil rights when you can force your religious values on everyone?"
-Senator Ted Cruz, when translated from Bullshitting to English

Um... can there be some respect here please? This is just utter disgusting, the way you are acting.

Also, religious or not, preventing a new life is WRONG. It just is. If you don't think so, fine, make a law allowing murder throughout your nation and see what happens.

Respect? I thought when you respected someone, you didn't force him or her to do something. For example, to have a child and pay for everything that child needs. That is disgusting. Spare me your moralistic nonsense.

Plus, I see you're opposed to welfare. I suppose that extends to the woman you forced into poverty by adding a second mouth to feed to her paycheck without any help. It's funny the way opposition to abortion and welfare always seem to dovetail, isn't it?

[Dobrobyt]

A choice to prevent a life? That is sickening to many, including myself.

ARI: That's irrelevant. Coffee is sickening to many, including myself. Does that mean we should outlaw coffee? No, we should allow people to drink the beverage of their choice. Can't you see why your argument is not persuasive?

Comparing coffee to preventing a life(murder)? That is one low bar.