[PASSED] Access to Abortion

[The Notorious Mad Jack]

Frankly, there's an easy solution - pass bill after bill after bill expanding access to abortion, subsidising abortion, encouraging abortion - and maybe eventually those that want to discriminate against women will fuck off out of this place for good.

What happened to when the anti-life crowd was for "safe, legal, and are"? Much like the American slavers of the 1850s, you've moved from "necessary evil" to "positive good".

Have fun Calhoun.

Hey if it drives your lot out of the WA and ends the debate once and for all, I'm in favour of it. Y'all didn't accept the blocker. Y'all obviously don't accept the status, and your alternatives aren't acceptable. So this is clearly the best solution.

[Separatist Peoples]

Ooc: that is a compromise. There is no good reason to compromise on this issue.

That's not a compromise, that's a national issue, not a WA one. Are you going to start regulating flag colors next?

Ooc: only if those flag colors start depriving people of essential rights.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Please explain for me? I am not going to sit here and argue pro-life vs pro-choice. One has merits, the other is control. I am a choicer myself, but I am tired of this debate. Leave it up to nations and maybe, just MAYBE this will end once and for all?

This is naive in the extreme. This body has passed blockers on this subject in the past and it didn't end the debate.

Abortion Legality Convention


Yes my name is on it, I did not write it

Abortionism is a missionary ideology. Its adherents are committed to spreading a culture of death.[/blocktext]

OOC: So is Catholicism. One of the many reasons I don't and I never will follow that particular denomination and why I won't view the Pope in the same light as millions of others.

Stop victimizing Catholicism and Christianity.

Stop mistaking this place for NSGeneral.

[Logon]

That's not a compromise, that's a national issue, not a WA one. Are you going to start regulating flag colors next?

The very long history of WA legislation on the issue proves that you are categorically wrong.

Just because we’ve legislated the issue in the past doesn’t mean that I, among others, would consider it a national issue.

[Wallenburg]

Ooc: that is a compromise. There is no good reason to compromise on this issue.

That's not a compromise, that's a national issue, not a WA one. Are you going to start regulating flag colors next?

The WA has already legislated twice on this matter. It's clearly not a national issue.

The very long history of WA legislation on the issue proves that you are categorically wrong.

Just because we’ve legislated the issue in the past doesn’t mean that I, among others, would consider it a national issue.

Your natsov argument is wrong and without any basis in reason.

[The New California Republic]

The very long history of WA legislation on the issue proves that you are categorically wrong.

Just because we’ve legislated the issue in the past doesn’t mean that I, among others, would consider it a national issue.

Cool. So your argument is NatSov only then? Discarded.

[Logon]

What happened to when the anti-life crowd was for "safe, legal, and are"? Much like the American slavers of the 1850s, you've moved from "necessary evil" to "positive good".

Have fun Calhoun.

Hey if it drives your lot out of the WA and ends the debate once and for all, I'm in favour of it. Y'all didn't accept the blocker. Y'all obviously don't accept the status, and your alternatives aren't acceptable. So this is clearly the best solution.

Your hostility towards others with differing opinions tells me you want an echo chamber, not a debate cahmber.

That's not a compromise, that's a national issue, not a WA one. Are you going to start regulating flag colors next?

Ooc: only if those flag colors start depriving people of essential rights.

Today I learned that the right of a person to be born isn't "essential" but the right to kill is!

That's not a compromise, that's a national issue, not a WA one. Are you going to start regulating flag colors next?

The WA has already legislated twice on this matter. It's clearly not a national issue.

Just because we’ve legislated the issue in the past doesn’t mean that I, among others, would consider it a national issue.

Your natsov argument is wrong and without any basis in reason.

Just because we’ve legislated the issue in the past doesn’t mean that I, among others, would consider it a national issue.

Cool. So your argument is NatSov only then? Discarded.

Oh so the WA is the all powerful global government now? Natsov is always a valid argument.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Oh so the WA is the all powerful global government now? Natsov is always a valid argument.

"If your radical faction wishes to have your absolute national sovereignty the main exit is always waiting for you at the first floor."

[The New California Republic]

Cool. So your argument is NatSov only then? Discarded.

Oh so the WA is the all powerful global government now? Natsov is always a valid argument.

Except it isn't, as shown by NatSov-only proposals being discarded, and NatSov-only arguments being generally looked at with utter disdain and contempt. As they should be.

[Logon]

Oh so the WA is the all powerful global government now? Natsov is always a valid argument.

"If your radical faction wishes to have your absolute national sovereignty the main exit is always waiting for you at the first floor."

I am willing to work with other nations, that is why I am here. Of course, rest assured that Logon will remain in noncompliance with this resolution if it passes.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I am willing to work with other nations

"X for doubt."

[Logon]

I am willing to work with other nations

"X for doubt."

The fact I am here, debating you in a civil manner, as opposed to the "Kick anyone who doesn't agree with me" people, shows I can work and compromise.

[Wallenburg]

Oh so the WA is the all powerful global government now?

Yes. WA law supersedes national laws, and there are no limits on what the WA may legislate on other than blockers passed by the WA.

Natsov is always a valid argument.

It's a logical fallacy is what it is.

[Wallenburg]

"If your radical faction wishes to have your absolute national sovereignty the main exit is always waiting for you at the first floor."

I am willing to work with other nations, that is why I am here. Of course, rest assured that Logon will remain in noncompliance with this resolution if it passes.

Rest assured you will be fined heavily under the mandates of the Administrative Compliance Act, your citizens will have legal recourse against your nation's violation of law under World Assembly Justice Accord, and member states including this one will impose punitive trade measures, until your noncompliance is resolved.

[Xeknos]

Full support.

[Logon]

I am willing to work with other nations, that is why I am here. Of course, rest assured that Logon will remain in noncompliance with this resolution if it passes.

Rest assured you will be fined heavily under the mandates of the Administrative Compliance Act, your citizens will have legal recourse against your nation's violation of law under World Assembly Justice Accord, and member states including this one will impose punitive trade measures, until your noncompliance is resolved.

Oh no! A fine for making our own laws! How scary!

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

"X for doubt."

The fact I am here, debating you in a civil manner, as opposed to the "Kick anyone who doesn't agree with me" people, shows I can work and compromise.

"'Debating' people, i.e. bullishly asserting your imagined moral superiority on the rest of these chambers does not actually equal compromise. In fact it is the stark opposite of it."

[Logon]

The fact I am here, debating you in a civil manner, as opposed to the "Kick anyone who doesn't agree with me" people, shows I can work and compromise.

"'Debating' people, i.e. bullishly asserting your imagined moral superiority on the rest of these chambers does not actually equal compromise. In fact it is the stark opposite of it."

Bullishly asserting your imagined moral superiority? It seems like more than a few others are doing it as well. Of course they're not wrong when they agree with you, right?

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Oh so the WA is the all powerful global government now? Natsov is always a valid argument.

Except it isn't, as shown by NatSov-only proposals being discarded, and NatSov-only arguments being generally looked at with utter disdain and contempt. As they should be.

If he were trying to repeal this legislation, you might have a point. But he isn't, so you don't.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

"'Debating' people, i.e. bullishly asserting your imagined moral superiority on the rest of these chambers does not actually equal compromise. In fact it is the stark opposite of it."

Bullishly asserting your imagined moral superiority?

"It is when you have actual slavers in your camp who goes uncondemned by your faction. As long as we see no condemnation of the slavers happily cohabiting in your living room - figuratively speaking - the Empire considers you all slaver-accomplices."

[Attempted Socialism]

Ooc: only if those flag colors start depriving people of essential rights.

Today I learned that the right of a person to be born isn't "essential" but the right to kill is!

Since, by law (And all relevant ethical considerations), personhood is bestowed upon birth, this argument is fairly incoherent. Though I will applaud you for refraining from the common "abortion is murder"-fallacy, that so many anti-choice advocates readily evoke.

[The New Sicilian State]

Bullishly asserting your imagined moral superiority? It seems like more than a few others are doing it as well. Of course they're not wrong when they agree with you, right?

"No, sir, they're only wrong when they are wrong. Incidentally, you are wrong."

[Logon]

Bullishly asserting your imagined moral superiority?

"It is when you have actual slavers in your camp who goes uncondemned by your faction. As long as we see no condemnation of the slavers happily cohabiting in your living room - figuratively speaking - the Empire considers you all slaver-accomplices."

OOC: I don't see the slaver? I see someone wrongfully asserting that women have a right to kill a child and a guy responding. Where is the slaver?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

"It is when you have actual slavers in your camp who goes uncondemned by your faction. As long as we see no condemnation of the slavers happily cohabiting in your living room - figuratively speaking - the Empire considers you all slaver-accomplices."

OOC: I don't see the slaver? I see someone wrongfully asserting that women have a right to kill a child and a guy responding. Where is the slaver?

OOC: His country gleefully sells slaves on the open market in IC. Ergo he's a slaver in IC.

[Wallenburg]

Bullishly asserting your imagined moral superiority?

"It is when you have actual slavers in your camp who goes uncondemned by your faction. As long as we see no condemnation of the slavers happily cohabiting in your living room - figuratively speaking - the Empire considers you all slaver-accomplices."

Whatever that nation's policies are, they are quite irrelevant to the positions of another nation that happens to share a single policy position with them. Remember that anyone can make any kind of nation on this site.