[PASSED] Access to Abortion

[Godular]

I have an issue with section two: "Funding. Members must pay for or provide directly abortions, abortifacients, and contraceptives to any recipient bona fide within their jurisdiction upon request. Members must also provide a means to access such services and commodities speedily and free at the point of service or provision." I believe that this will be a financial burden on small or developing nations with the WA. MEMBER NATIONS DO NOT HAVE AN UNENDING EXPENSE ACCOUNT.

"We addressed this contention earlier."

[Heavens Reach]

That does not mean it is no longer illegal. Forcing a woman to undergo an abortion against her will is not suddenly rendered acceptable by this proposal, nor does any resolution currently in effect.

You're thinking far too narrowly about this, ambassador. You're hyperfixated on this one particular scenario and missing the entire point. So we'll limit our argument as well to one strict irrefutable sentence, in the hopes that you'll find it more digestible: this resolution arbitrarily, superfluously, defines personhood, and the primary practical outcome is that the intentional killing of a fetus, irrespective of the abortive procedure, will be completely decriminalized barring the passage of additional legislation.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I have an issue with section two: "Funding. Members must pay for or provide directly abortions, abortifacients, and contraceptives to any recipient bona fide within their jurisdiction upon request. Members must also provide a means to access such services and commodities speedily and free at the point of service or provision." I believe that this will be a financial burden on small or developing nations with the WA. MEMBER NATIONS DO NOT HAVE AN UNENDING EXPENSE ACCOUNT.

Do you not have gynecological departments at your hospitals?

[Heavens Reach]

And, furthermore, in anticipation of your argument, our statement made no mention of forced abortions, which represent a gross oversimplification of the issue it addresses.

[Wallenburg]

I have an issue with section two: "Funding. Members must pay for or provide directly abortions, abortifacients, and contraceptives to any recipient bona fide within their jurisdiction upon request. Members must also provide a means to access such services and commodities speedily and free at the point of service or provision." I believe that this will be a financial burden on small or developing nations with the WA. MEMBER NATIONS DO NOT HAVE AN UNENDING EXPENSE ACCOUNT.

I was unaware small and developing nations were wracked by an infinite number of abortions.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I have an issue with section two: "Funding. Members must pay for or provide directly abortions, abortifacients, and contraceptives to any recipient bona fide within their jurisdiction upon request. Members must also provide a means to access such services and commodities speedily and free at the point of service or provision." I believe that this will be a financial burden on small or developing nations with the WA. MEMBER NATIONS DO NOT HAVE AN UNENDING EXPENSE ACCOUNT.

I was unaware small and developing nations were wracked by an infinite number of abortions.

I am also alarmed by the number of people who seems to entirely lack gynecologists at their hospitals.

[Wallenburg]

Next, they'll make it mandatory for people to sing and dance by abortions because "it makes mother happy"

Hey, there's an idea.

It's okay, I found ways to get around it without breaking WA law.

I doubt that very much.

[Yshrenia]

My nation needs to have a high birth rate if it’s going to have the necessary manpower to conquer the world. Therefore, I will oppose this resolution.

[Atheris]

My nation needs to have a high birth rate if it’s going to have the necessary manpower to conquer the world. Therefore, I will oppose this resolution.

That's a unique reason for opposition. Me likey.

[Godular]

That does not mean it is no longer illegal. Forcing a woman to undergo an abortion against her will is not suddenly rendered acceptable by this proposal, nor does any resolution currently in effect.

You're thinking far too narrowly about this, ambassador. You're hyperfixated on this one particular scenario and missing the entire point. So we'll limit our argument as well to one strict irrefutable sentence, in the hopes that you'll find it more digestible: this resolution arbitrarily, superfluously, defines personhood, and the primary practical outcome is that the intentional killing of a fetus, irrespective of the abortive procedure, will be completely decriminalized barring the passage of additional legislation.

Zodiac chuckles. "With all due respect, YOU are thinking far too narrowly about this. You seem to be hooked upon the idea that this resolution somehow treats any and all circumstances in which a pregnancy is terminated as an abortion to be decriminalized, but this is not the case."

And, furthermore, in anticipation of your argument, our statement made no mention of forced abortions, which represent a gross oversimplification of the issue it addresses.

"Yes you did. As a matter of fact, it was a response to exactly that claim that began this particular bout of back-and-forth. If I might remind you:"

We're not speaking probabilistically, ambassador. Among the issues that this creates, it effectively decriminalizes killing a fetus that someone is carrying, that they have not yet carried to term, >>even if they strongly desired to do so<<.

"How else am I to interpret that comment other than you claiming that this resolution makes it impossible for you to prosecute the action of forcing another person into an abortion, or forcibly causing a miscarriage without the pregnant party's consent?"

[The New California Republic]

‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎





‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎

Fascinating. Want a side of words to go with that main of blank?

[Depolis]

The great and sovereign nation of Depolis finds two alarmingly faulty issues with this proposed motion. First and foremost, the issue of safety and guidelines therein are not properly laid out, but rather left (most likely) intentionally vague. While this still allows for each nation to impose their sovereign rights, it does create a morality complex as to what is deemed safe and healthy. This needs to be addressed before this motion can be ratified.

Secondly, the opening wording of this motion opposes the entire premise of this cause. By beginning with a verbal attack on nations that oppose the position of abortion, but then wording the rest of the motion to pander to each nations sovereign rights, this motion fails to uphold its own position, causing it to be inherently flawed. A simple removal or alteration of the “attack language” in the opening premise would remedy this issue.

[Godular]

The great and sovereign nation of Depolis finds two alarmingly faulty issues with this proposed motion. First and foremost, the issue of safety and guidelines therein are not properly laid out, but rather left (most likely) intentionally vague. While this still allows for each nation to impose their sovereign rights, it does create a morality complex as to what is deemed safe and healthy. This needs to be addressed before this motion can be ratified.

Secondly, the opening wording of this motion opposes the entire premise of this cause. By beginning with a verbal attack on nations that oppose the position of abortion, but then wording the rest of the motion to pander to each nations sovereign rights, this motion fails to uphold its own position, causing it to be inherently flawed. A simple removal or alteration of the “attack language” in the opening premise would remedy this issue.

"Relating to your first point, that concern has already been addressed by previous legislation on the subject. It is also important to note that nations are expected to hold to the spirit of the legislation, not necessarily the letter."

[Imperium Anglorum]

My nation needs to have a high birth rate if it’s going to have the necessary manpower to conquer the world. Therefore, I will oppose this resolution.

Or you just get overthrown in 18 years by your underfed population... https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/05/16/wh ... a-alabama/

[MC United]

MC United utterly opposes this resolution, for reasons too numerous to list. Call us "rabid" all you like. The WA will find it difficult to enforce this imposition on the culture and values of MC United.

“Luckily, it is the government of MC United who, I am sure, will have the necessary skills to enforce laws upon the populace. The World Assembly will only need to step in the event of the state failing to fulfil its role in enforcement.

As I am here, I would like to declare my vote in favour of this proposal. It enacts further protections on the civil rights of WA inhabitants in an unambiguous and loophole-free manner.”

"Indeed it is the government of MC United that will have the responsibility for enforcing this outrage. And the WA can be sure that the government of MC United will do everything in its power to minimize the impact said outrage has on Uniter society. Starting with anti-abortion education and instruction on respect for life from conception in every grade from kindergarten through graduate university level and, in particular, medical schools. And continuing with pro-life messaging throughout the entertainment industry and the culture at large. Abortion will become socially unacceptable, its advocates enemies of society, its practitioners moral lepers.

And our judicial system and administrative agencies will find creative ways to implement Uniter values.

The rabid anti-life faction of the WA may think they can force supply, but they bloody well cannot force demand.

Vote NO."

[Atheris]

IC:

"The Soviet Union sees no reason not to vote against this proposal. The Soviet delegation stands headstrong in its endeavors, and no argument will sway our vote."

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

“Luckily, it is the government of MC United who, I am sure, will have the necessary skills to enforce laws upon the populace. The World Assembly will only need to step in the event of the state failing to fulfil its role in enforcement.

As I am here, I would like to declare my vote in favour of this proposal. It enacts further protections on the civil rights of WA inhabitants in an unambiguous and loophole-free manner.”

"Indeed it is the government of MC United that will have the responsibility for enforcing this outrage. And the WA can be sure that the government of MC United will do everything in its power to minimize the impact said outrage has on Uniter society. Starting with anti-abortion education and instruction on respect for life from conception in every grade from kindergarten through graduate university level and, in particular, medical schools. And continuing with pro-life messaging throughout the entertainment industry and the culture at large. Abortion will become socially unacceptable, its advocates enemies of society, its practitioners moral lepers.

And our judicial system and administrative agencies will find creative ways to implement Uniter values.

The rabid anti-life faction of the WA may think they can force supply, but they bloody well cannot force demand.

Vote NO."

You could... idfkn quit the WA instead of contorting yourself in this medieval manner.

[The New California Republic]

The rabid anti-life faction of the WA may think they can force supply, but they bloody well cannot force demand.

But Ambassador, the demand must surely be there if this is an issue in the first place?

[Jutsa]

"I'm terribly sorry, but while we're pro-abortion in some cases, and find resolution #128 a perfectly acceptable piece of legislation covering abortion facilities and availability,
we do not in any way support this resolution."

Members must pay for or provide directly abortions, abortifacients, and contraceptives to any recipient bona fide within their jurisdiction upon request. Members must also provide a means to access such services and commodities speedily and free at the point of service or provision.

"This feels redundant given the existence of this clause in #128:"

FURTHER REQUIRES member countries to ensure that abortion facilities are easily available to patients seeking abortion in circumstances under Section 1

"While this is a comparatively narrow margin compared to 'all abortion', I personally feel that, on an international level as wide as this assembly, this should be sufficient."

Members must arrange fully subsidised travel for any recipient bona fide, and one person of their choice, to receive care offered by such a clinic if abortion services are not speedily accessible. No limitation, except to prohibit travel to nations in which there is an on-going armed conflict, may be enforced by a member on a person's ability to exit a member for purposes of travelling to a clinic unless permitted by resolution.

"I see. So now if a clinic is not speedily accessible, then the state has to pay for any person wanting an abortion to be sent to another nationstate, regardless of their World Assembly status, regardless of border security, regardless of rivalries, regardless of danger outside of armed conflict?"

Members must pay for or provide directly abortions, abortifacients, and contraceptives to any recipient bona fide within their jurisdiction upon request.

"Oh? So this means that anyone can have any abortion they want for almost any reason, regardless of what a majority populace, or government,
believes is right or has a deeply held religious stance against?
And the same populace and government is expected to pay for it, regardless of what intentions there are?"

Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution and unless otherwise indicated by previous resolution, a member may restrict access to or section 2 funding for an abortion if that member can show that a sex-selective basis clearly impels its request.

"Oh? But they can't if it's a matter of designer babies, or color, or has some mild defect?"

Members shall ascribe personhood to begin at birth.

"Oh, and now we're going to legalize any abortion that is requested just before birth? While I and the nation of Jutsa as a whole stand firmly against this,
we understand that some nations may choose to allow this. But this is for nations to choose, and this assembly dictating that all member states not only allow it,
but supply for and pay for it, is a total disregard for not only unborn fetuses, but all those, both individuals and nations, who are even remotely pro-life. Against."

[The Angry Peasant Crusader Mob]

Jokes on you guys we never invented abortion, and therefore do not recognize this piece of legislation.

[Heavens Reach]

Zodiac chuckles. "With all due respect, YOU are thinking far too narrowly about this. You seem to be hooked upon the idea that this resolution somehow treats any and all circumstances in which a pregnancy is terminated as an abortion to be decriminalized, but this is not the case."

No, we're not. We're pointing out that removing personhood directly abolishes the possibility of charging someone who intentionally kills a fetus outside of the context of a lawfully sought abortion as murder. I don't think you quite understand the legal weight of personhood. But as we have said numerous times now, you are completely missing the point. This reductio ad absurdum completely bypasses the moral argument for more practical consideration, when, practically speaking, the results of this resolution are exactly as we have described them.

[Slaughter None]

Opposed

[Heavens Reach]

"How else am I to interpret that comment other than you claiming that this resolution makes it impossible for you to prosecute the action of forcing another person into an abortion, or forcibly causing a miscarriage without the pregnant party's consent?"

That is literally not our argument, ambassador. We consistently keep repeating the same thing: it decriminalizes killing the fetus, regardless of the feelings of the one carrying it.

[ImperialRussia]

I disapprove abortion my nation needs more soldiers and workers in the work force.

[Minskiev]

The predicament with my nation is that of course we allow abortions, and if this was a law to be passed in my nation, of course it would pass. However, this is forcing nations that are strictly against abortions for reasons such as religion, patriarchy, and others to lose some sovereignty in their decision-making. If this was perhaps rewritten, then I’d vote for.