[Draft] Repeal Reproductive Freedoms

[Victorlandia]

Hello all, a couple of things first off:
This is my first attempt at a resolution. While I've read through the rules and tried to get a good idea of the protocol for these things, I've almost certainly messed something up. I invite correction on protocol and procedural issues. Also note that the alternating coloration is just to make reading the paragraphs easier while saving space.
If you feel I've misread or misunderstand aspects of the original resolution (GR 286), then state why and how. I certainly do not think myself infallible and healthy debate is key on issues such as this.
Finally, if you want to suggest edits for how I've worded the draft or anything like that, PLEASE DO. That's why it's here after all.

Repeal GR#286 Reproductive Freedoms
Description:
Acknowledging abortion to be a controversial topic with deeply held beliefs both for and against it.
Further acknowledging and applauding that Reproductive Freedoms seeks to protect individual freedoms such as privacy.
Noting that a prohibition against “any impediment to the termination of pregnancy that is not applied to medical procedures of similar risk and complexity” does not cover any instances where abortion might be unique.
Worryingly recognizing that in cultures where one sex is more highly valued than the other, cases of sex selective abortion, which has no comparable analog in any other medical procedures, do occur.
Deducing that these sex selective abortions can cause substantial population imbalance which can itself be the source of severe social and economic problems for sovereign nations and further infringe on the rights of the disadvantaged sex.
Affirming the right of nations to protect both their own interests and minority rights in cases of overriding public interest.
Noting further that the “termination of pregnancies” referred to in the resolution is vague as to precisely when, in the eyes of the law, a fetus gains protection. This implicitly approves both partial and post birth abortions and for killing those fetuses that survive an abortion procedure while providing no timetable as to when it stops becoming a “medical procedure”
Reaffirming the stated goal of the World Assembly to allow its member states substantial freedom in cases of their own sovereign interests.
Do hereby repeal Reproductive Freedoms (GR #286)

[Separatist Peoples]

Hello all, a couple of things first off:
This is my first attempt at a resolution. While I've read through the rules and tried to get a good idea of the protocol for these things, I've almost certainly messed something up. I invite correction on protocol and procedural issues. Also note that the alternating coloration is just to make reading the paragraphs easier while saving space.
If you feel I've misread or misunderstand aspects of the original resolution (GR 286), then state why and how. I certainly do not think myself infallible and healthy debate is key on issues such as this.
Finally, if you want to suggest edits for how I've worded the draft or anything like that, PLEASE DO. That's why it's here after all.

Repeal GR#286 Reproductive Freedoms
Description:
Acknowledging abortion to be a controversial topic with deeply held beliefs both for and against it.
Further acknowledging and applauding that Reproductive Freedoms seeks to protect individual freedoms such as privacy.
Noting that a prohibition against “any impediment to the termination of pregnancy that is not applied to medical procedures of similar risk and complexity” does not cover any instances where abortion might be unique.
Worryingly recognizing that in cultures where one sex is more highly valued than the other, cases of sex selective abortion, which has no comparable analog in any other medical procedures, do occur.
Deducing that these sex selective abortions can cause substantial population imbalance which can itself be the source of severe social and economic problems for sovereign nations and further infringe on the rights of the disadvantaged sex.
Affirming the right of nations to protect both their own interests and minority rights in cases of overriding public interest.
Noting further that the “termination of pregnancies” referred to in the resolution is vague as to precisely when, in the eyes of the law, a fetus gains protection. This implicitly approves both partial and post birth abortions and for killing those fetuses that survive an abortion procedure while providing no timetable as to when it stops becoming a “medical procedure”
Reaffirming the stated goal of the World Assembly to allow its member states substantial freedom in cases of their own sovereign interests.
Do hereby repeal Reproductive Freedoms (GR #286)

"Aww, not this shit again...First thing, don't use different colors. Just use line breaks like everybody else. I'm wholly unconvinced by your "societal breakdown through gender mismatch" bit. It's pretty far fetched to me, since states have a myriad of other methods of preventing unrest then banning sex selective abortions.

"A unique abortion would have similar complications to a unique medical procedure of similar risk and complexity, and nations are allowed to impose restrictions accordingly. Terrible argument.

"Lastly, if you find the vagaries in the text especially egregious, patch them up with your own laws. Nothing prevents you from legislation further on a topic if a GA resolution leaves you room.

"In short, like hell."

[The Dark Star Republic]

This has no chance of passing, so there is little point adding substantive comments. However this

Reaffirming the stated goal of the World Assembly to allow its member states substantial freedom in cases of their own sovereign interests.

is an intriguing statement. Where did you find this "stated goal"? I've never seen it before.

[The Flood]

You have the Flood's full support. We must repeal legalized genocide immediately.

[Defwa]

You have the Flood's full support. We must repeal legalized genocide immediately.

The flood, which cannot offer support, offers support.

[The Flood]

You have the Flood's full support. We must repeal legalized genocide immediately.

The flood, which cannot offer support, offers support.

We most certainly can offer our support.

[Ardchoille]

You have the Flood's full support. We must repeal legalized genocide immediately.

The flood, which cannot offer support, offers support.

I'd like to think I'm misunderstanding you, Defwa, since your comments are usually fair enough. But if that's an attempt to revive the old "you're not in the WA, so nerny-ner!" thing, don't do it. There will be tears before bedtime.

Some players are deeply interested in the WA, but don't let their GA puppet join (often for RP reasons). Others have practical reasons. This was resolved way back in the dark ages of NS by accepting that some nations prefer Observer status. The value of someone's support or opposition isn't solely determined by WA membership -- there are some silvertongued nations around who could talk the devil into church.

[Defwa]

The flood, which cannot offer support, offers support.

I'd like to think I'm misunderstanding you, Defwa, since your comments are usually fair enough. But if that's an attempt to revive the old "you're not in the WA, so nerny-ner!" thing, don't do it. There will be tears before bedtime.

Some players are deeply interested in the WA, but don't let their GA puppet join (often for RP reasons). Others have practical reasons. This was resolved way back in the dark ages of NS by accepting that some nations prefer Observer status. The value of someone's support or opposition isn't solely determined by WA membership -- there are some silvertongued nations around who could talk the devil into church.

OOC My apologies- I personally and defwas delegation take personal offense at anyone trying to influence the WA while simultaneously refusing to take part in it. I simply mean that the flood, for all intents and role playing purposes, has no voting capacity or political power due to its self imposed RP isolation

[The Flood]

I'd like to think I'm misunderstanding you, Defwa, since your comments are usually fair enough. But if that's an attempt to revive the old "you're not in the WA, so nerny-ner!" thing, don't do it. There will be tears before bedtime.
Some players are deeply interested in the WA, but don't let their GA puppet join (often for RP reasons). Others have practical reasons. This was resolved way back in the dark ages of NS by accepting that some nations prefer Observer status. The value of someone's support or opposition isn't solely determined by WA membership -- there are some silvertongued nations around who could talk the devil into church.

OOC My apologies- I personally and defwas delegation take personal offense at anyone trying to influence the WA while simultaneously refusing to take part in it. I simply mean that the flood, for all intents and role playing purposes, has no voting capacity or political power due to its self imposed RP isolation

I have a W/A puppet. So actually, I literally can, and do vote.

[Araraukar]

I simply mean that the flood, for all intents and role playing purposes, has no voting capacity or political power due to its self imposed RP isolation

OOC: ...neither does Araraukar.

I have a W/A puppet. So actually, I literally can, and do vote.

Same here, but you may have noticed one major difference between our approaches, Flood; I partake the discussions rather than going on about how Araraukar doesn't follow this or that resolution, or how its laws prohibit this or that. It's a given that my nation can ignore the resolutions as it's not in the WA. I don't try to make WA nations conform to my laws, I just try to help people make their proposals sensible, viable and, hopefully, passable.

I'm sure you're capable of that too. If your RP reality makes it impossible (though I really doubt you'd have an ambassador here if that was the case), partake in OOC. Most people around here will allow that.

[Separatist Peoples]

I simply mean that the flood, for all intents and role playing purposes, has no voting capacity or political power due to its self imposed RP isolation

OOC: ...neither does Araraukar.

OOC: And neither does the C.D.S.P.

Same here, but you may have noticed one major difference between our approaches, Flood; I partake the discussions rather than going on about how Araraukar doesn't follow this or that resolution, or how its laws prohibit this or that. It's a given that my nation can ignore the resolutions as it's not in the WA. I don't try to make WA nations conform to my laws, I just try to help people make their proposals sensible, viable and, hopefully, passable.

I'm sure you're capable of that too. If your RP reality makes it impossible (though I really doubt you'd have an ambassador here if that was the case), partake in OOC. Most people around here will allow that.

OOC: This. This is the biggest problem that I, and others, have seemed to have with your RPing, Flood. You don't contribute to the discussion, you declare singular absolutist statements as if they mean something to the rest of us, then threaten nations that disagree with the universal blah blah authority of your emperor. It isn't fun, and it contributes nothing. If you at least mixed in real debate with the dreck, it would be infinitely more palatable.

IC: "Unsurprisingly, it doesn't look as if this is making long strides to a successful submission. I propose we let it die here, stretched out in the searing sunlight with nary a soul in sight."

[Araraukar]

IC: "Unsurprisingly, it doesn't look as if this is making long strides to a successful submission. I propose we let it die here, stretched out in the searing sunlight with nary a soul in sight."

At least it was aborted early enough... *hides from thrown objects due to bad pun*

[The Flood]

OOC: This. This is the biggest problem that I, and others, have seemed to have with your RPing, Flood. You don't contribute to the discussion, you declare singular absolutist statements as if they mean something to the rest of us, then threaten nations that disagree with the universal blah blah authority of your emperor. It isn't fun, and it contributes nothing. If you at least mixed in real debate with the dreck, it would be infinitely more palatable.

OOC: Many other nations simply specify their nation's opinion on the issue, and leave it at that, without contributing anything other then that.

I'm not too fond of trying to argue with people who stick their fingers in their ears and don't even slightly consider anyone else's views, and that's exactly what most pro-choice proponents do. Why should I both spending tons of time writing up a good argument, when I'll just get dreck from people like that guy that just goes around saying all pro-life people are misogynist idiots in his posts that are riddled with awful spelling and grammar? I just don't see the point.

[Defwa]

OOC: This. This is the biggest problem that I, and others, have seemed to have with your RPing, Flood. You don't contribute to the discussion, you declare singular absolutist statements as if they mean something to the rest of us, then threaten nations that disagree with the universal blah blah authority of your emperor. It isn't fun, and it contributes nothing. If you at least mixed in real debate with the dreck, it would be infinitely more palatable.

OOC: Many other nations simply specify their nation's opinion on the issue, and leave it at that, without contributing anything other then that.

I'm not too fond of trying to argue with people who stick their fingers in their ears and don't even slightly consider anyone else's views, and that's exactly what most pro-choice proponents do. Why should I both spending tons of time writing up a good argument, when I'll just get dreck from people like that guy that just goes around saying all pro-life people are misogynist idiots in his posts that are riddled with awful spelling and grammar? I just don't see the point.

OOC: Your arguments are usually "this is evil because god/emperor", though. There's not much for us to respond to. Or remember my bodily integrity act? Something along the lines of "the flood won't support this because we don't believe in bodily integrity." No input on a counter idea or window for conversation even.

[The Flood]

OOC: Many other nations simply specify their nation's opinion on the issue, and leave it at that, without contributing anything other then that.

I'm not too fond of trying to argue with people who stick their fingers in their ears and don't even slightly consider anyone else's views, and that's exactly what most pro-choice proponents do. Why should I both spending tons of time writing up a good argument, when I'll just get dreck from people like that guy that just goes around saying all pro-life people are misogynist idiots in his posts that are riddled with awful spelling and grammar? I just don't see the point.

OOC: Your arguments are usually "this is evil because god/emperor", though. There's not much for us to respond to. Or remember my bodily integrity act? Something along the lines of "the flood won't support this because we don't believe in bodily integrity." No input on a counter idea or window for conversation even.

OOC: That was never an argument, it was RP. I've hardly ever actually tried to argue about stuff on NS, I got most of that out of my system a long time ago when I learned not to bother arguing with people who won't ever listen no matter what is said, and on top of that, I'm not great at argumentation, and would rather let others who are proficient do the arguing.

[Wrapper]

I'm not too fond of trying to argue with people who stick their fingers in their ears and don't even slightly consider anyone else's views

[Araraukar]

OOC: That was never an argument, it was RP. I've hardly ever actually tried to argue about stuff on NS, I got most of that out of my system a long time ago when I learned not to bother arguing with people who won't ever listen no matter what is said, and on top of that, I'm not great at argumentation, and would rather let others who are proficient do the arguing.

OOC: The GA forum might be the wrong forum for you, then.

[Hirota]

I'm not great at argumentation

You know, I think that's been noticed...

and would rather let others who are proficient do the arguing.

And yet you continue to do so? I don't mean to offend, but if you are "not great" at participating in debates, yet you continue to do so regardless, why would anyone take you seriously?

[Araraukar]

And yet you continue to do so? I don't mean to offend, but if you are "not great" at participating in debates, yet you continue to do so regardless, why would anyone take you seriously?

OOC: It's not the "not being great" at debating to partake - how else will anyone learn in the first place? - it's the "not taking part in the argument at all" and using RP as an excuse for one-liner statements that's annoying to many.

But this is developing into a dogpile. And as Flood seems to continue to, how did he put it...

stick their fingers in their ears and don't even slightly consider anyone else's views

...it seems it's futile for us to try to reason with him. I'm sure the mods will soon appear here to splice this out/lock the thread and tell us to ignore him. "Nobody has to play with everybody" or how does the saying go?

[Wrapper]

Ah, good point, we should get back on topic, so:

VIOLENTLY opposed.

Which says a lot more than you think for a pacifist nation.

[Bananaistan]

As always, the Republic of Bananaistan stands opposed to any attempt to repeal Reproductive Freedoms.

[Frisbeeteria]

I thoroughly endorse the repeal of such a heinous act.

[Defwa]

I thoroughly endorse the repeal of such a heinous act.

Congrats on your first act in this assembly being necromancy.

Protip- this forum is busy so don't go more than a week back when there has been no activity in that thread.
It will get the thread locked, which bars the author from coming back to revitalize their draft, annoys everyone else, and can get you suspended from the assembly.

Thanks for not going ahead and writing a repeal on your own- people who start their careers trying to author are laughed out because it takes a lot of practice critiquing before you can write something barely palatable. Consider participating in one of the more active debates. Take hints and queues from other ambassadors, and avoid having "I support" or "I disapprove" be the only things you say.
Make sure you explain why something is wrong and how it can be fixed.

[Nulono]

Strictly speaking, RF doesn't legalize abortion, only "pregnancy termination". If, like the USSN, your country's laws permit ending a pregnancy, but criminalize killing an unborn child, you are technically compliant with the letter of the law.

[Chester Pearson]

I thoroughly endorse the repeal of such a heinous act.

Why was this bumped after almost three weeks?