United Massachusetts wrote:The World Assembly continues to grasp at a sovereignty it never enjoyed to begin with. Unsurprising.
I expected a better grasp of the most basic mechanics of the World Assembly from such a well-established regular.
Advertisement
by Wallenburg » Fri Jul 10, 2020 1:25 pm
United Massachusetts wrote:The World Assembly continues to grasp at a sovereignty it never enjoyed to begin with. Unsurprising.
by ImperialRussia » Fri Jul 10, 2020 1:33 pm
by Godular » Fri Jul 10, 2020 1:36 pm
ImperialRussia wrote:These our children in my nation and we should respect them for our future generations and not murder them these our people they’ll shall mercy from birth no matter if there adopted.
by MC United » Fri Jul 10, 2020 2:04 pm
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote: You could... idfkn quit the WA instead of contorting yourself in this medieval manner.
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Fri Jul 10, 2020 2:11 pm
by ImperialRussia » Fri Jul 10, 2020 2:19 pm
by Draganisia » Fri Jul 10, 2020 2:19 pm
by Wallenburg » Fri Jul 10, 2020 2:33 pm
ImperialRussia wrote:These our children in my nation and we should respect them for our future generations and not murder them these our people they’ll shall mercy from birth no matter if there adopted. Will still oppose abortion because it’s murder no matter if the victim is rapped the rapist will Be sentenced to death and the government ensure maternity leave for child so it the governments burden to take care of the child and so it’s the mothers choose to adopt child or take care on her own. Our government are not dogs that who killed there kin if it wasn’t there blood will give mercy to those who not given a choice to live because there father was a coward who decided to rape someone for there perverted it our choice to take care of the child and not to abort but adopt it to our military and train that to do better in society and tell what his father mistake shall never will repeat again.
by Jutsa » Fri Jul 10, 2020 2:39 pm
by Attempted Socialism » Fri Jul 10, 2020 2:49 pm
Jutsa wrote:"To point out to many seemingly drunk ambassadors complaining about sovereignty over choice vs. life, we do already have legislation that mandates that abortion be made legal and available. It's the principle of yet a third piece of similar, albeit better written, legislation being passed forcing all nations and taxpayers to pay for it, at times potentially at the expense of national security. Not to mention that existing legislation comes off at least somewhat considerate, while this appears arrogant and inconsiderate to those who are pro-life."
Represented in the World Assembly by Ambassador Robert Mortimer Pride, called The Regicide Assume OOC unless otherwise indicated. My WA Authorship. | Cui Bono, quod seipsos custodes custodiunt? Bobberino: "The academic tone shines through." | Who am I in real life, my opinions and notes My NS career |
by Flying Eagles » Fri Jul 10, 2020 3:47 pm
by Velosia » Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:13 pm
Firstly, we want to make it clear that the majority of Velosians support the intended outcome of this resolution, as does this delegation as it is assembled here today. However we must respectfully oppose the passage of this resolution due to the significant financial and societal problems that have the potential to arise within developing member nations and member nations with large populations of citizens who are either wary of or openly opposed to membership within the World Assembly.
The relatively few outliers aside, the majority of member nations that are set to be most affected by this resolution are already host to substantial numbers of citizens who, as a result of financial or political problems currently facing their societies, are unable to access the most basic healthcare, even without the added obligations called for in this resolution. Even if not a majority, a not-insignificant number of member nations would not have the financial means or the infrastructure necessary to effectively implement the various programmes and institutions this resolution aims to establish.
It's also important to note that the poorest and most politically unstable nations are also often the most religiously and socially conservative. Not only will this resolution negatively impact the economies of the nations it will almost certainly apply the most to, it also risks harming the ongoing efforts of this assembly to bring a swift, but considerate, end to national anti-abortion legislation. Whilst this delegation is aware of the numerous extent resolutions that openly support the right to abortion, they generally approach the issue in a more respectful and less economically damaging way. This particular resolution on the subject, while laudable in what it ultimately hopes to achieve, is borderline hostile in its opening and needlessly punitive in its intent.
Our interpretation of this resolution is that, given the mandatory financial obligations and seeming lack of exceptions or provisions for nations that are unable to meet said obligations, it will only serve to negatively affect member nations that are already in difficult financial and societal situations. The majority of the developed world, with healthcare systems and economies that are able to take on the additional costs and obligations this resolution calls for, already have comprehensive national abortion legislation that meets the internationally-acceptable standards set by the World Assembly. As such, we cannot offer our support to this resolution.
by Jutsa » Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:17 pm
"Not quite. As anyone with more than a passing familiarity of the anti-choice advocates in the World Assembly knows, the anti-choice delegations have long flaunted their complete disregard for the laws and the decent compromises they represented. That is why On Abortion had to be assisted by Reproductive Freedom, and now those two resolutions can be further supported by passing Access to Abortion. If anti-choice nations had simply accepted the laws when they passed, and the verdict of the many failed repeals, rather than the continued and flagrant disregard for established World Assembly law, this whole thing would have stopped around On Abortion. The increased hostility that you think you detect is a very measured, very respectful and very considerate response to years and decades of aggressive and deliberate lawlessness perpetrated by a few rogue states."
DEMANDS that Member Nations prohibit any impediment to the termination of pregnancy that is not applied to medical procedures of similar risk and complexity,
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:18 pm
Attempted Socialism wrote:"anti-choice...anti-choice...anti-choice...blah blah blah"
by Godular » Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:19 pm
Velosia wrote:Kingdom of Velosia
AGAINSTFirstly, we want to make it clear that the majority of Velosians support the intended outcome of this resolution, as does this delegation as it is assembled here today. However we must respectfully oppose the passage of this resolution due to the significant financial and societal problems that have the potential to arise within developing member nations and member nations with large populations of citizens who are either wary of or openly opposed to membership within the World Assembly.
The relatively few outliers aside, the majority of member nations that are set to be most affected by this resolution are already host to substantial numbers of citizens who, as a result of financial or political problems currently facing their societies, are unable to access the most basic healthcare, even without the added obligations called for in this resolution. Even if not a majority, a not-insignificant number of member nations would not have the financial means or the infrastructure necessary to effectively implement the various programmes and institutions this resolution aims to establish.
It's also important to note that the poorest and most politically unstable nations are also often the most religiously and socially conservative. Not only will this resolution negatively impact the economies of the nations it will almost certainly apply the most to, it also risks harming the ongoing efforts of this assembly to bring a swift, but considerate, end to national anti-abortion legislation. Whilst this delegation is aware of the numerous extent resolutions that openly support the right to abortion, they generally approach the issue in a more respectful and less economically damaging way. This particular resolution on the subject, while laudable in what it ultimately hopes to achieve, is borderline hostile in its opening and needlessly punitive in its intent.
Our interpretation of this resolution is that, given the mandatory financial obligations and seeming lack of exceptions or provisions for nations that are unable to meet said obligations, it will only serve to negatively affect member nations that are already in difficult financial and societal situations. The majority of the developed world, with healthcare systems and economies that are able to take on the additional costs and obligations this resolution calls for, already have comprehensive national abortion legislation that meets the internationally-acceptable standards set by the World Assembly. As such, we cannot offer our support to this resolution.
by Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:24 pm
by Picairn » Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:47 pm
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:I'm just surprised at the number of nations coming forth to argue that they have a financial inability to provide common and important oral hormone supplements. Do y'all also have this problem when it comes to insulin?
by Tinfect » Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:55 pm
Picairn wrote:Not to mention that all abortion clinics will be tax-exempt from now on when the proposal passes.
Imperium Central News Network: EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL CITIZENS ARE TO PROCEED TO EVACUATION SITES IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL FURTHER SUBSPACE SIGNALS AND SYSTEMS ARE TO BE DISABLED IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: THE FOLLOWING SYSTEMS ARE ACCESS PROHIBITED BY STANDARD/BLACKOUT [Error: Format Unrecognized] | Indomitable Bastard #283
by Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:57 pm
Picairn wrote:Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:I'm just surprised at the number of nations coming forth to argue that they have a financial inability to provide common and important oral hormone supplements. Do y'all also have this problem when it comes to insulin?
Read the proposal carefully. It also mandates that nations must subsidise travels for abortion abroad and cover the costs for the building, operation and maintenance of abortion clinics, ready to speedily provide free contraceptives and other abortion services upon request. Not to mention that all abortion clinics will be tax-exempt from now on when the proposal pass.
This is eye-poppingly expensive. In the real world, not even European countries or Canada subsidises travel and other services for abortions. This proposal would be mocked and demolished for incurring enormous costs.
by Jutsa » Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:02 pm
by United Massachusetts » Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:03 pm
by The Palentine » Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:04 pm
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Attempted Socialism wrote:"anti-choice...anti-choice...anti-choice...blah blah blah"
Still waving around his Wild Turkey™ bottle, Jimmy turned toward the Palentine delegation, where Sen. Sulla appeared to be drinking moonshine straight from the jar. "Horatio, my good man," he cheerfully slurred: "This calls for a drinking game; one shot everytime some idiot says 'anti-choice'. I bet I drink you right under the table, you flipping lightweight!"
He burped loudly and nearly fell on his ass while trying to back into his seat...then, naturally, took another swig.
EDIT: I must have been drunk myself when I was trying to type this.
by Imperium Anglorum » Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:40 pm
United Massachusetts wrote:It looks as though TNP propped this up to vote by installing delegates. It is unfortunate, needless to say.
by Godular » Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:42 pm
Imperium Anglorum wrote:United Massachusetts wrote:It looks as though TNP propped this up to vote by installing delegates. It is unfortunate, needless to say.
This is really fucking rich coming from UM, who led the use of raiders to stop this proposal from reaching quorum. And after opprobrium from GA regulars, vowed never to do it again ("I don't regret this specific action, but I won't do it again" WA Discord, 2020-04-26), and then immediately led another series of raids in a systematic and organised attempt to stop this proposal.
UM admitted to this on Discord and trumpeted it on your region's RMB. He admitted to attempting to rig the Annual Review poll this week. He admitted to cooperating in a conspiracy to overthrow the North Pacific. UM makes the nukes but then after everyone makes bigger nukes he wants to put them away. If TNP and I have sawdust in our eyes, he should pay attention that the trees and thornbushes growing out of his do not affect his sight.
by Flying Eagles » Fri Jul 10, 2020 6:20 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement