Abortion Neutrality Act [Given Up]

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

While I was at church this morning, I got the idea for this due to contemplation over all the stuff here. Now, I do want advice on how to make this better, so, any help to flesh this out is welcome. (and if everybody thinks it sucks I'll just cancel the idea)

NOTING that abortion is a highly personal issue,

DECLARES that abortion's legality is an issue best left to be determined each and every nation through its own political processes, further,

MANDATES that the World Assembly's stance on abortion's legality be neutral

Also, not sure of the category it should be.

[Kryozerkia]

It is the best suggestion I've heard yet.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

It is the best suggestion I've heard yet.

Wow, why thank you.

[Celestial Sphere]

Would it not count as a blocker? As far as I can see, it also doesn't require WA member nations to introduce new legislation.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

Would it not count as a blocker? As far as I can see, it also doesn't require WA member nations to introduce new legislation.

Huh, what's a blocker? >.>;

[Celestial Sphere]

A proposal introduced with the primary aim of preventing further legislation on an issue. I think it's illegal if your proposal is just a blocker - ie it doesn't do anything more.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

A proposal introduced with the primary aim of preventing further legislation on an issue. I think it's illegal if your proposal is just a blocker - ie it doesn't do anything more.

Mmm, oh, ok, I see. Well, I guess I'll just have this locked then.

[Kryozerkia]

A proposal introduced with the primary aim of preventing further legislation on an issue. I think it's illegal if your proposal is just a blocker - ie it doesn't do anything more.

It is not repeal proof though. It merely states a stance of neutrality. The WA could still regulate abortions to ensure that the environment it is performed in is safe. That the medicine used for it is tested properly. It isn't preventing future issues, other than anything which will change the immediate stance of neutrality. Neutrality doesn't prevent legislation to ensure safety.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

A proposal introduced with the primary aim of preventing further legislation on an issue. I think it's illegal if your proposal is just a blocker - ie it doesn't do anything more.

It is not repeal proof though. It merely states a stance of neutrality. The WA could still regulate abortions to ensure that the environment it is performed in is safe. That the medicine used for it is tested properly. It isn't preventing future issues, other than anything which will change the immediate stance of neutrality. Neutrality doesn't prevent legislation to ensure safety.

Ah, ok, thanks for letting me know. Disregard the lock thing I said. >.>

[Seperate Vermont]

Hear,Hear!

Finally, a sense of sensibility among collaboration rather than this "I LIKE IT THIS WAY AND I WANT ALL NATIONS TO BE LIKE THIS!!!1!!!" pathetic whining.

[The Cat-Tribe]

A proposal introduced with the primary aim of preventing further legislation on an issue. I think it's illegal if your proposal is just a blocker - ie it doesn't do anything more.

It is not repeal proof though. It merely states a stance of neutrality. The WA could still regulate abortions to ensure that the environment it is performed in is safe. That the medicine used for it is tested properly. It isn't preventing future issues, other than anything which will change the immediate stance of neutrality. Neutrality doesn't prevent legislation to ensure safety.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Could you or someone else please help this ignorant fool find the rule or ruling against "blocking" proposals in the first place? And define a "blocking" proposal? I've had trouble locating this information -- despite looking for it in the Rules, Q&A, Reference Guide, and by searches.

[The Cat-Tribe]

By the way, despite being fiercely pro-choice and believing every person in every nation in the WA has an inalienable right to their own bodies which includes a right to abortion, I would strongly approve of a sensible compromise measure like this.

WAR#44 already should do much to reduce or eliminate the problem of abortion throughouth the WA and the combination of respect for national sovereignty, the dignity of my opponent's views, and the intractability of any fight "to win" internationally either way makes simply leaving the issue to individual nations to decide the issue is the best course of action for everyone.

Kudos to Umbra Ac Silentium.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

Thanks for all the praise everyone, but is there any way at all I can improve this? Or should I try submitting, or what? >.>

[Sionis Prioratus]

Thanks for all the praise everyone, but is there any way at all I can improve this? Or should I try submitting, or what? >.>

Submit right away. Seriously.

[Mahaj WA Seat]

submit.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

Alright, will do then.
*edit*
But what category to place it in?

[Mahaj WA Seat]

Alright, will do then.

great!

[Mahaj WA Seat]

Alright, will do then.
*edit*
But what category to place it in?

Moral Decency?

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

Alright, will do then.
*edit*
But what category to place it in?

Moral Decency?

Huh, but it doesn't really seem like it would fit there. Maybe Political Stability?

[Mahaj WA Seat]

Moral Decency?

Huh, but it doesn't really seem like it would fit there. Maybe Political Stability?

something like this doesn't really fit anywhere. but maybe... human rights?

its either moral decency, political stability, or human rights.
i want to say the first, but, hey, its your proposal.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

Huh, but it doesn't really seem like it would fit there. Maybe Political Stability?

something like this doesn't really fit anywhere. but maybe... human rights?

its either moral decency, political stability, or human rights.
i want to say the first, but, hey, its your proposal.

Ya, but I do like some help deciding. I'll wait and see if somebody else says anything on the category. Then to determine the strength...

[Mahaj WA Seat]

something like this doesn't really fit anywhere. but maybe... human rights?

its either moral decency, political stability, or human rights.
i want to say the first, but, hey, its your proposal.

Ya, but I do like some help deciding. I'll wait and see if somebody else says anything on the category. Then to determine the strength...

strength: i'd say strong, after all, we are determining the stance of most of the world.

you can wait some if you want, or you can just submit it now.

[Celestial Sphere]

A proposal introduced with the primary aim of preventing further legislation on an issue. I think it's illegal if your proposal is just a blocker - ie it doesn't do anything more.

It is not repeal proof though. It merely states a stance of neutrality. The WA could still regulate abortions to ensure that the environment it is performed in is safe. That the medicine used for it is tested properly. It isn't preventing future issues, other than anything which will change the immediate stance of neutrality. Neutrality doesn't prevent legislation to ensure safety.

My other question still stands - is this not illegal because it fails to introduce legislation in WA member states?

[Free Tristania]

Hear hear ! The WA needs more of such proposals. Not everything has to be organised and harmonised by the Assembly. And a lot of nations can decide for themselves. It is high time that the WA concerns itself with more serious issues like international trade, diplomacy and internal organisation.

[Unibot]

Hhmm.. category. Human Rights/Mild. I think. But perhaps political stability/mild, because the issue of abortion is being reduced as a viable topic for the WA.