NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Access to Abortion

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13804
Founded: Jun 28, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Fri Jul 10, 2020 11:54 pm

Picairn wrote:
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:OOC: The fact that you think a 2 dollar drug is "too expensive" while being twice as rich as the richest motherfuckers on the planet tells me that your argument is wholly spurious and that you are motivated by other things in your opposition.

The fact that you are arguing on a mischaracterization of my arguments, when I have never claimed anything against contraceptives, tells me that you are here to stomp out all opposition with ideological dogma than arguing with good faith or reason.

It tells me that you are motivated by a close-minded view of the world and you prefer to stay in your echo chamber than addressing any of my objections.

So then tell us all why providing the option for abortifacients and counselling together with regular maternal care that you already provide if your country is sane is too onerous for you?
Last edited by Austria-Bohemia-Hungary on Fri Jul 10, 2020 11:56 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Picairn
Diplomat
 
Posts: 861
Founded: Feb 21, 2020
New York Times Democracy

Postby Picairn » Fri Jul 10, 2020 11:58 pm

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:
Picairn wrote:The fact that you are arguing on a mischaracterization of my arguments, when I have never claimed anything against contraceptives, tells me that you are here to stomp out all opposition with ideological dogma than arguing with good faith or reason.

It tells me that you are motivated by a close-minded view of the world and you prefer to stay in your echo chamber than addressing any of my objections.

So then tell me why providing the option for abortifacients and counselling together with regular maternal care that you already provide if your country is sane is too onerous for you?

Why didn't you address the crux of my arguments, which is the topic of subsidised travels and maintaining abortion clinics to be speedily available and free at the point of service, at all time?
Picairn's Ministry of Foreign Relations
Minister: Edward H. Cornell
WA Ambassador: John M. Terry (Active)
Pauline M. Warburton (Staff)
Long live the Emperor!
The Greater Ohio Valley wrote:Ayn Rand is a war criminal

Vivian James wrote:It is sophistry to try to redefine your opponent's arguments. It might feel good...

But so can jerking off in a subway.

The Emerald Legion wrote:Nobody generates wealth. Wealth exists. You simply shift it around, or sometimes discover more.

Atheris wrote:Blaming religion for Trump is like blaming science for tear gas.

User avatar
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13804
Founded: Jun 28, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Fri Jul 10, 2020 11:59 pm

OOC: Because if you are already providing this service via the national healthcare system your argument becomes wholly spurious, because if abortion is already readily available the provisions of this resolution becomes moot. Now tell us all why you think $200/month (in USA) for a populace with an alleged income of $114,000/year is too onerous for you.
Last edited by Austria-Bohemia-Hungary on Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:01 am, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
Shazbotdom
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8315
Founded: Sep 28, 2004
Anarchy

Postby Shazbotdom » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:02 am

Picairn wrote:
Shazbotdom wrote:"You, see, the issue is that the GenSec rules in Legalities, not what you are wanting them to do. And if it reached Quarum with it going to a vote, then the GenSec ruled that it is a Legal Proposal. So I don't understand what you think that they are going to do that will benefit you, Ambassador." Ambassador Flabberghast stated into his microphone. "At this point in time, the only thing that will cause this Proposal to not become a Resolution is for you to put forth a Telegram Campaign to the membership of the General Assembly to get them to vote Nay on it. But seeing as the current tally of votes is 7,856 Aye's to 3,790 Nay's, it looks like that it is on track to pass. Although, you do have roughly 69 Hours to put together some sort of coherent Telegram Campaign to try and sway votes your way, and possibly get some of those Aye's to change their votes to Nay. Although, I will let you know, that the Empire will not change it's vote as we have already voted Aye."

"The fact that GenSec has the final say in Legalities, or the little challenge that you just issued to me, Ambassador, is irrelevant to the current discussion. I see that you have failed to address any of my arguments, instead insisting on challenging me with a condescending tone. If you pride yourself on 'winning' debates instead of discussing in good faith, then I have nothing more to say to you."

"If you really wish for these issues of yours to be addressed, might I suggest putting forth an official Legality Challenge through the proper challenge, then." Antoine takes a sip of a brownish liquid. "If it really is that big of a deal, then step foot three doors down into the chambers of the GenSec and put forth a Legality Challenge on why you think it is Illegal."
Jorgensen/Cohen 2020 || #LetHerSpeak #LetHerDebate
Darth Bane/Darth Vader 2020 -- Together, we can Rule the Galaxy!

The Shazbotdom Empire || ShazWeb || IIWiki || Embassies v6.0 || Discord: YourDaddyShaz#0741
ShazAir || Shaz City International Airport || Shazbotdom News Corporation (News Thread)
Shazbert Bot's Gaming Adventures || PolyComp: E: -0.52 | S: -3.33 || WSPT: E: 100% | P: 100%

User avatar
Prussian-Germany
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 59
Founded: Jun 05, 2020
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Prussian-Germany » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:04 am

Any Goodwill that the Prussian-Germanian (Man, that is a mouth-full!) people had for the WA is slowly coming a-part: It isn't the abortion per say (though my people firmly believe that that should be left up to the nations themselves), but why should the government pay for your car expenses to the clinic, THEN PAY FOR SAID CLINIC, then pay for the same car ride back? And God help you're Department of Treasury if they have car troubles or an accident.

On the behave of my people and of my region, we disagree.

I would be more agreeable to the subject if the government (which is money-strapped enough as it is) has to pay for, and what could be rightfully considered as, an private business.
King of Alvonia
5-Star General & Commander-in-Chief of the Alvonian Imperial Army and VolksFriekorps
Minister of Defense of the Kingdom of Alvonia

User avatar
Picairn
Diplomat
 
Posts: 861
Founded: Feb 21, 2020
New York Times Democracy

Postby Picairn » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:04 am

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Because if you are already providing this service via the national healthcare system your argument becomes wholly spurious, because if abortion is already readily available the provisions of this resolution becomes moot. Now tell us all why you think $200/month (in USA) for a populace with an alleged imcome of 114,000/year is too onerous for you.

No national healthcare system covers subsidised travels or fully free abortions, even in liberal Europe. Many even have time restrictions, which this proposal will undoubtedly decry as "rabidly anti-choice".

And what does the $200/month thing have anything to do with the current topic at hand?
Picairn's Ministry of Foreign Relations
Minister: Edward H. Cornell
WA Ambassador: John M. Terry (Active)
Pauline M. Warburton (Staff)
Long live the Emperor!
The Greater Ohio Valley wrote:Ayn Rand is a war criminal

Vivian James wrote:It is sophistry to try to redefine your opponent's arguments. It might feel good...

But so can jerking off in a subway.

The Emerald Legion wrote:Nobody generates wealth. Wealth exists. You simply shift it around, or sometimes discover more.

Atheris wrote:Blaming religion for Trump is like blaming science for tear gas.

User avatar
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13804
Founded: Jun 28, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:05 am

Picairn wrote:
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Because if you are already providing this service via the national healthcare system your argument becomes wholly spurious, because if abortion is already readily available the provisions of this resolution becomes moot. Now tell us all why you think $200/month (in USA) for a populace with an alleged imcome of 114,000/year is too onerous for you.

No national healthcare system covers subsidised travels or fully free abortions, even in liberal Europe. Many even have time restrictions, which this proposal will undoubtedly decry as "rabidly anti-choice".

And what does the $200/month thing have anything to do with the current topic at hand?

Why if abortion is readily available in country A do you see a refugee stream of abortion seekers to country B? Explain this shit.

User avatar
Prussian-Germany
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 59
Founded: Jun 05, 2020
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Prussian-Germany » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:06 am

Prussian-Germany wrote:Any Goodwill that the Prussian-Germanian (Man, that is a mouth-full!) people had for the WA is slowly coming a-part: It isn't the abortion per say (though my people firmly believe that that should be left up to the nations themselves), but why should the government pay for your car expenses to the clinic, THEN PAY FOR SAID CLINIC, then pay for the same car ride back? And God help you're Department of Treasury if they have car troubles or an accident.

On the behave of my people and of my region, we disagree.

I would be more agreeable to the subject if the government (which is money-strapped enough as it is) has to pay for, and what could be rightfully considered as, an private business.


Do we really need to pay for a business that is not a part of the government in any way?
King of Alvonia
5-Star General & Commander-in-Chief of the Alvonian Imperial Army and VolksFriekorps
Minister of Defense of the Kingdom of Alvonia

User avatar
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13804
Founded: Jun 28, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:06 am

Prussian-Germany wrote:Any Goodwill that the Prussian-Germanian (Man, that is a mouth-full!) people had for the WA is slowly coming a-part: It isn't the abortion per say (though my people firmly believe that that should be left up to the nations themselves), but why should the government pay for your car expenses to the clinic, THEN PAY FOR SAID CLINIC, then pay for the same car ride back? And God help you're Department of Treasury if they have car troubles or an accident.

On the behave of my people and of my region, we disagree.

I would be more agreeable to the subject if the government (which is money-strapped enough as it is) has to pay for, and what could be rightfully considered as, an private business.

OOC: Because if you are already providing this service via the national healthcare system your argument becomes wholly spurious, because if abortion is already readily available in house the provisions of this resolution becomes moot.

User avatar
Prussian-Germany
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 59
Founded: Jun 05, 2020
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Prussian-Germany » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:21 am

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:
Prussian-Germany wrote:Any Goodwill that the Prussian-Germanian (Man, that is a mouth-full!) people had for the WA is slowly coming a-part: It isn't the abortion per say (though my people firmly believe that that should be left up to the nations themselves), but why should the government pay for your car expenses to the clinic, THEN PAY FOR SAID CLINIC, then pay for the same car ride back? And God help you're Department of Treasury if they have car troubles or an accident.

On the behave of my people and of my region, we disagree.

I would be more agreeable to the subject if the government (which is money-strapped enough as it is) has to pay for, and what could be rightfully considered as, an private business.

OOC: Because if you are already providing this service via the national healthcare system your argument becomes wholly spurious, because if abortion is already readily available in house the provisions of this resolution becomes moot.


But say, dear friend, that the government does not have that, and is trying desperately to have a powerful military might like you do?
King of Alvonia
5-Star General & Commander-in-Chief of the Alvonian Imperial Army and VolksFriekorps
Minister of Defense of the Kingdom of Alvonia

User avatar
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13804
Founded: Jun 28, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:22 am

Your country collapses because you've spent too much on what's essentially welfare for 80 divisions along with buying supercarriers. That or become Eritrea. Because you tried to be the Soviet Union while being Eritrea. And that's all on this wholly irrelevant jingoistic tangent.
Last edited by Austria-Bohemia-Hungary on Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:24 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Prussian-Germany
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 59
Founded: Jun 05, 2020
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Prussian-Germany » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:24 am

not when a good 90% of your 10 trillion dollar economy is going to defense.
King of Alvonia
5-Star General & Commander-in-Chief of the Alvonian Imperial Army and VolksFriekorps
Minister of Defense of the Kingdom of Alvonia

User avatar
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13804
Founded: Jun 28, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:24 am

Prussian-Germany wrote:not when a good 90% of your 10 trillion dollar economy is going to defense.

Ok eritrea.

User avatar
Shazbotdom
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8315
Founded: Sep 28, 2004
Anarchy

Postby Shazbotdom » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:26 am

Prussian-Germany wrote:not when a good 90% of your 10 trillion dollar economy is going to defense.

"You do realize that your 'Economy' isn't your Governmental Budget, right? If that was the case, you'd have a 100% tax rate and people would be living in mud huts because there would be no houses for the people," Antoine states as he puts his head in his hands because of the stupidity that the Ambassador just stated.
Jorgensen/Cohen 2020 || #LetHerSpeak #LetHerDebate
Darth Bane/Darth Vader 2020 -- Together, we can Rule the Galaxy!

The Shazbotdom Empire || ShazWeb || IIWiki || Embassies v6.0 || Discord: YourDaddyShaz#0741
ShazAir || Shaz City International Airport || Shazbotdom News Corporation (News Thread)
Shazbert Bot's Gaming Adventures || PolyComp: E: -0.52 | S: -3.33 || WSPT: E: 100% | P: 100%

User avatar
Prussian-Germany
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 59
Founded: Jun 05, 2020
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Prussian-Germany » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:28 am

I'm sorry, my good man, but I'm afraid I don't understand the reference.
King of Alvonia
5-Star General & Commander-in-Chief of the Alvonian Imperial Army and VolksFriekorps
Minister of Defense of the Kingdom of Alvonia

User avatar
Prussian-Germany
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 59
Founded: Jun 05, 2020
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Prussian-Germany » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:32 am

Shazbotdom wrote:
Prussian-Germany wrote:not when a good 90% of your 10 trillion dollar economy is going to defense.

"You do realize that your 'Economy' isn't your Governmental Budget, right? If that was the case, you'd have a 100% tax rate and people would be living in mud huts because there would be no houses for the people," Antoine states as he puts his head in his hands because of the stupidity that the Ambassador just stated.


I do apologize, the missiles kept blowing up the connection over here and I miss-read it.
King of Alvonia
5-Star General & Commander-in-Chief of the Alvonian Imperial Army and VolksFriekorps
Minister of Defense of the Kingdom of Alvonia

User avatar
Picairn
Diplomat
 
Posts: 861
Founded: Feb 21, 2020
New York Times Democracy

Postby Picairn » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:57 am

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Why if abortion is readily available in country A do you see a refugee stream of abortion seekers to country B? Explain this shit.

Define "readily available". In Europe most nations provide abortions upon request, but with additional restrictions like time limits, waiting periods with counselling, and so on. A woman who doesn't like being hassled by these delays can travel abroad to seek abortions, and none of these European countries cover those travel costs. Not to mention IA's resolution is worded like the states will also have to cover transportation costs to clinics within their countries, like cars or trains to the abortion clinics. That's insane.

And we're not even touching the topic of building new clinics and maintaining them to provide speedy services, available upon request at any time.
Picairn's Ministry of Foreign Relations
Minister: Edward H. Cornell
WA Ambassador: John M. Terry (Active)
Pauline M. Warburton (Staff)
Long live the Emperor!
The Greater Ohio Valley wrote:Ayn Rand is a war criminal

Vivian James wrote:It is sophistry to try to redefine your opponent's arguments. It might feel good...

But so can jerking off in a subway.

The Emerald Legion wrote:Nobody generates wealth. Wealth exists. You simply shift it around, or sometimes discover more.

Atheris wrote:Blaming religion for Trump is like blaming science for tear gas.

User avatar
Trsmk2
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 12
Founded: Nov 20, 2019
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Trsmk2 » Sat Jul 11, 2020 1:01 am

Godular wrote:
Trsmk2 wrote:People should believe in God,

Instead of encouraging women to have abortions


“That ship sailed long ago, friendo.”


Antichrist?

User avatar
Attempted Socialism
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1052
Founded: Feb 21, 2011
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Attempted Socialism » Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:34 am

Picairn wrote:
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Just how many tens of thousands of tons of misoprostol do you think you'll need?

Did I say anything against contraceptives? If you have tens of thousands of tons of materials for new medical equipments and clinics for abortions, then good, I'll need some. Also some money for subsidising travel abortions.

"I really do not see the reason for this level of hostility. Can one not acquire an abortive pill at one's general practitioner? In the Solidarity Movement 80+% of abortions happen within the first eight weeks, which is a single doctors visit where the patient gets a simple treatment in pill form. No travel subsidies or medical equipment is necessary except in less than one-in-twenty cases, which are generally medical emergencies anyway. Is your medical apparatus not able to handle current requests for abortions, or have you set up a system where people already have to travel far to obtain an abortion? I know that the extensive social net of the Solidarity Movement is not commonplace, but one would assume a health service as well-funded as the Picairnian already has the necessary GP clinics, gynecologists and hospitals for much this resolution to be moot. We have free medicine and contraception, so this resolution will have literally no effect for us, as we already fulfill the requirements for access, thus negating the need for new clinics and subsidies for travel. I think you could check if you already fulfill the requirements, it might save you a headache."

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.

"I hope the Kennyite delegation has good healthcare," the Ambassador said grimly to her aide, "as their livers may soon be in some danger."

Jutsa wrote:
"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."


"This is somewhat my point, ambassador. Pro-choice already has two bodies of increasingly progressive legislation, and pro-life has none. While we're in favor of pro-choice,
I think you're missing our point — Reproductive Freedom is not a "decent compromise", it is a strictly pro-choice stance.
And yet those bodies of legislation stand not repealed. Yet, anyway.

Furthermore,"
DEMANDS that Member Nations prohibit any impediment to the termination of pregnancy that is not applied to medical procedures of similar risk and complexity,

"I think if there are nations circumnavigating this existing clause, then you have a much larger issue than passing another resolution saying the same thing,
yet also making the nationstate pay for everything and mandating patients be flown to neighboring countries,
almost regardless of context, if access is deemed 'not quick enough'.

I think it's safe to say things could have stopped at On Abortion. Anything more, as this states,
is anything but a 'very measured, very respectable and very considerate response', as you put it."

"When I say 'decent compromise', I mean a compromise between any relevant and legitimate parties. On Abortion would have been a decent compromise had the anti-choice side accepted it as the law of the land. Instead they had to deliberately make a show of being in violation of the resolution. Sadly there are enough intransigent nations who would rather wreck their legal and healthcare systems than accept bodily sovereignty to make further enforcement necessary. This is squarely aimed at the deliberately non-compliant. With the years and decades of flagrant oppression of women and clear and excessive breaches of international law, they have had ample opportunity to rectify their policies. Why should we indulge them?"


Represented in the World Assembly by
Ambassador and Chairperson of the Executive International Relations Committee
Marcie Elizabeth 'MacBeth' Illum
Cui Bono, quod seipsos custodes custodiunt?
Ivory Tower Critical-Realistic Sardonic Marxist Curmudgeon
Danish Political Scientist Seeks True Love Tenure
Specialities: State development; corruption; IR theory; Vodka
Experiences: Office-running; political campaigns; navigating byzantine academia politics

User avatar
Literally God Almighty
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Jan 10, 2018
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Literally God Almighty » Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:44 am

Trsmk2 wrote:People should believe in God,

Instead of encouraging women to have abortions

"Dude," THE LORD boomed from on high, "I encourage women to have abortions all the time. Unfaithful wives (Numbers 5:21-21, 27-28), my enemies (Psalm 58:8) and both women, children, infants and the unborn are killed whenever my chosen people go to war. Have you even read my book?" THE LORD scoffed at the nonbelievers from Trsmk2.

User avatar
Servilis
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 428
Founded: May 07, 2017
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Servilis » Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:49 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Grays Harbor wrote:Provide me one good reason I should not consign this to the flames as illegal frivolity?

I'll give you three: (1) it is a violation of your duty as a Secretariat member to judge the legality of proposals based on the rules as they are written in the sticky, (2) binding precedent says no, and (3) the persuasive and not-binding precedent of the Silly/Illegals zOMG days also says no. Re 2 supra:

We do not agree that the proposal violates the Joke rule. As stated in the challenge, key words here are "intended," "solely," and while there is indeed a certain amount of humor in the draft, that draft also recognizeably intends serious, material effects on the World Assembly. If you remove the definition clause, and change the preambulatory clauses to more pedestrian language, the proposal retains its effect on member states. WA nations must still comply with the proposal, whose meaning in law has not changed. The funny bits "carry no legislative weight," and "do not affect the rest of the resolution."

Therefore, while the proposal is clearly intended to be humorous, it is equally clear that that is not its sole intent; and that the proposal affects nations beyond those effects (which are negligible) attributable to the humorous bits. Thus the proposal does not violate the Joke/Silly Proposals rule and we say it is legal as regards that question.

If you want to pull up the legality challenge red tape, let me lay a welcome mat. I omitted something from the drafting Google Doc: FDR's famous Madison Square Garden quote. Seems opportune.

OOC : a. This is spicy,
b. holy shit you literally just wrecked a moderator
and c. holy fuck

/skip
Last edited by Servilis on Sat Jul 11, 2020 5:07 am, edited 2 times in total.
she/her - they know me as yeoss

The Yeossist Manifesto

User avatar
Servilis
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 428
Founded: May 07, 2017
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Servilis » Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:51 am

Kaystein wrote:This is one reason why people say NS has a left-bent

Maybe it's because a lot of the WA is comprised of Progressives and such?
she/her - they know me as yeoss

The Yeossist Manifesto

User avatar
Tinhampton
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7167
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Tinhampton » Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:55 am

Servilis wrote:/skip

Does this look like Forum 7?

To Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, please show me where it says that Picairn's GDP per capita is twice that of Liechtenstein. Regardless, still opposed to this resolution.
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 319,372): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Alexander Smith, WA Delegate-Ambassador ~ Achievements
3 SC Resolutions + 0 co-authored:
A: SC#250, Repeal "Liberate Femdom Empire" (87%)
A: SC#251, Commend Alasdair I Frosticus (91%)
A: SC#267, Repeal "Liberate The East Pacific" (90%)

1 GA Resolution + 1 co-authored:
A: GA#484, Disease Naming Compact (54%)
C: GA#491, Rights of the employed (54%)

1 Issue:
C: #1115, One in the Arm for @@LEADER@@?

Cup of Harmony 73 CHAMPIONS

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5701
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Capitalizt

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Sat Jul 11, 2020 4:07 am

Servilis wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:--snip--

a. This is spicy,
b. holy shit you literally just wrecked a moderator
and c. holy fuck

sigh...

a. GH is not a moderator,
b. holy shit you're literally responding to a post from three months ago
and c. jiminy jillikers
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
Ardiveds
Envoy
 
Posts: 261
Founded: Feb 28, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ardiveds » Sat Jul 11, 2020 4:21 am

Picairn wrote:Define "readily available". In Europe most nations provide abortions upon request, but with additional restrictions like time limits, waiting periods with counselling, and so on. A woman who doesn't like being hassled by these delays can travel abroad to seek abortions, and none of these European countries cover those travel costs. Not to mention IA's resolution is worded like the states will also have to cover transportation costs to clinics within their countries, like cars or trains to the abortion clinics. That's insane.

And we're not even touching the topic of building new clinics and maintaining them to provide speedy services, available upon request at any time.

OOC: Wait a minute, what the actual fuck? Is this really the case? Can anyone clarify this? Does the government has to pay for a woman's uber ride if she's going to get an abortion?

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads