[DRAFT] Repeal Reproductive Freedoms

[United Massachusetts]

Repeal Reproductive Freedoms

Understanding the vast diversity of views in member nations concerning abortion and the termination of pregnancy,

Noting the moral objections many nations have to the practice,

Alarmed that member nations are required to permit procedures such as partial birth abortion,

Appalled that member nations are forced to permit abortion up to the time of birth and during it, even though fetuses have been shown to be fully alive and developed in the later stages of pregnancy,

Noting that children in much of pregnancy have a beating heart, functional body, and well-developed senses,

Shocked that the extreme measures of Reproductive Freedoms have overextended to permit the abortion of fetuses who are clearly alive,


Understanding the noble goal of providing the individual the right to control their body,

However clarifying that significant protections for this freedom are already provided by other World Assembly resolutions,

Hoping that reasonable rights over pregnancy are protected by this assembly,

Believing that General Assembly Resolution #286 is clearly an overreaching and extreme resolution that provides no protection to the living being in the womb,

Demanding that any resolution passed on this important moral issue should have a reasonable balance of protections for the rights of both the fetus and its mother,

Disappointed that Reproductive Freedoms does not contain said balance and as such, does not deserve to be a law of this august Assembly,

Hereby Repeals General Assembly Resolution #286: Reproductive Freedoms

So, I'm going to try to edit, then resubmit this. It likely won't pass (it's at vote now), so I think I'll spend some more time drafting
EDIT 1: Changed wording, replaced child with fetus

[Separatist Peoples]

"As usual, we intend to use every ounce of political clout we have to oppose this."

[Ovybia]

Reproductive Freedoms does allow criminalizing of partial birth abortion but nothing sooner. I think you should also say that it forces nations to legalize abortions in all circumstances even for killing children because of their disability.

[Separatist Peoples]

Reproductive Freedoms does allow criminalizing of partial birth abortion but nothing sooner. I think you should also say that it forces nations to legalize abortions in all circumstances even for killing children because of their disability.

"Why is that a bad thing? Allowing individuals to terminate their pregnancies when tests indicate disability not only saves them great hardship, it limits government expenditure. States have a vested interest in limiting disabilities among their population."

[Imperium Anglorum]

Reproductive Freedoms does allow criminalizing of partial birth abortion but nothing sooner. I think you should also say that it forces nations to legalize abortions in all circumstances even for killing children because of their disability.

"Why is that a bad thing? Allowing individuals to terminate their pregnancies when tests indicate disability not only saves them great hardship, it limits government expenditure. States have a vested interest in limiting disabilities among their population."

From a consequentialist perspective, I concur.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Why is that a bad thing? Allowing individuals to terminate their pregnancies when tests indicate disability not only saves them great hardship, it limits government expenditure. States have a vested interest in limiting disabilities among their population."

From a consequentialist perspective, I concur.

"At the end of the day, states mostly are consequentialist."

[Frustrated Franciscans]

"As usual, we intend to use every ounce of political clout we have to oppose this."

"As usual, we intend to use very ounce of our political clout we have to support this."

[Separatist Peoples]

"As usual, we intend to use every ounce of political clout we have to oppose this."

"As usual, we intend to use very ounce of our political clout we have to support this."

"We look forward to meeting your campaign on the field of...campaigning."

[Imperium Anglorum]

"As usual, we intend to use every ounce of political clout we have to oppose this."

"As usual, we intend to use very ounce of our political clout we have to support this."

Parsons yells in the most advert-like commercial announcer yell imaginable, 'Ounces? Now introducing... milligrams and milliliters!'

[Araraukar]

"As usual, we intend to use every ounce of political clout we have to oppose this."

"As usual, we intend to use very ounce of our political clout we have to support this."

Parsons yells in the most advert-like commercial announcer yell imaginable, 'Ounces? Now introducing... milligrams and milliliters!'

Yeah, but "we intend to use every gram of political clout we have to oppose this" doesn't sound as good.

[Separatist Peoples]

Parsons yells in the most advert-like commercial announcer yell imaginable, 'Ounces? Now introducing... milligrams and milliliters!'

Yeah, but "we intend to use every gram of political clout we have to oppose this" doesn't sound as good.

"Every buttload of political clout. Because, as politicians and lawyers, we're all full of it."

[Wallenburg]

Yeah, but "we intend to use every gram of political clout we have to oppose this" doesn't sound as good.

"Every buttload of political clout. Because, as politicians and lawyers, we're all full of it."

"Ambassador, I believe the preferred unit of measurement is the 'fuckton'."

[Wrapper]

Back on topic, please.

[Wallenburg]

Back on topic, please.

"Yes, sir."

Ogenbond turns to face the author. "Under no circumstances will my office ever support this proposal. That is all I have to say."

[Westercourt]

Believing that General Assembly Resolution #286 is clearly an overreaching and extreme resolution that provides no protection to the child,

Demanding that any resolution passed on this important moral issue should have a reasonable balance of protections for the rights of both the child and the mother,

Disappointed that Reproductive Freedoms does not contain said balance and as such, does not deserve to be a law of this august Assembly,

I am of the opinion that RFA is quite vague and ought to be replaced with something more specific and more allowing of choice in the matter. However, it should be the choice of the peoples of the nations to decide when to draw the line, or if a line shall be drawn. It should not be in the hands of the World Assembly to draw that line (with, of course, some reasonable minimum at when a nation may draw the line to protect freedoms). Should the proposal be modified to allow for this freedom, it would have Westercourt's full support.

[Ovybia]

Believing that General Assembly Resolution #286 is clearly an overreaching and extreme resolution that provides no protection to the child,

Demanding that any resolution passed on this important moral issue should have a reasonable balance of protections for the rights of both the child and the mother,

Disappointed that Reproductive Freedoms does not contain said balance and as such, does not deserve to be a law of this august Assembly,

I am of the opinion that RFA is quite vague and ought to be replaced with something more specific and more allowing of choice in the matter. However, it should be the choice of the peoples of the nations to decide when to draw the line, or if a line shall be drawn. It should not be in the hands of the World Assembly to draw that line (with, of course, some reasonable minimum at when a nation may draw the line to protect freedoms). Should the proposal be modified to allow for this freedom, it would have Westercourt's full support.

This is a repeal which means it can't legislate anything. A replacement proposal would have to be drafted and I agree with your replacement idea.

[Arach-Naga Combine]

Believing that General Assembly Resolution #286 is clearly an overreaching and extreme resolution that provides no protection to the child,

Demanding that any resolution passed on this important moral issue should have a reasonable balance of protections for the rights of both the child and the mother,

Disappointed that Reproductive Freedoms does not contain said balance and as such, does not deserve to be a law of this august Assembly,

I am of the opinion that RFA is quite vague and ought to be replaced with something more specific and more allowing of choice in the matter. However, it should be the choice of the peoples of the nations to decide when to draw the line, or if a line shall be drawn. It should not be in the hands of the World Assembly to draw that line (with, of course, some reasonable minimum at when a nation may draw the line to protect freedoms). Should the proposal be modified to allow for this freedom, it would have Westercourt's full support.

And by what measure is RF an improper line at which to defend personal freedoms?

[Westercourt]

And by what measure is RF an improper line at which to defend personal freedoms?

It is too extensive, Ambassador. Late-term abortion need not be required legal to ensure personal freedom.

This is a repeal which means it can't legislate anything. A replacement proposal would have to be drafted and I agree with your replacement idea.

Of course. I simply meant that language supporting further restrictions should not be in the proposal. That is a decision to be made by the World Assembly later.

[Separatist Peoples]

It is too extensive, Ambassador. Late-term abortion need not be required legal to ensure personal freedom.

"Why? Does a woman's body suddenly become not her own as the due date approaches?"

[Westercourt]

"Why? Does a woman's body suddenly become not her own as the due date approaches?"

As the due date approaches, the pregnancy becomes more and more of a person with their own body. Just when the unborn child gains personhood, is a matter of debate, but as long as the debate exists, forcing nations to allow all abortions at any time in all nations and cultures is not appropriate. A reasonable period for the woman to make a decision on the pregnancy should of course be protected, but nations should also have the right to decide when the unborn child will come under protection, if at all.

[Araraukar]

forcing nations to allow all abortions at any time in all nations and cultures is not appropriate.

And why should the nation or the culture have the right to a woman's body over her own bodily rights?

[Westercourt]

And why should the nation or the culture have the right to a woman's body over her own bodily rights?

Because at some point, there is a logical, viable, and objective argument that the child also has bodily rights, and denying the right of nations to have that argument is not something that this assembly should be permitted to do.

[Araraukar]

there is a logical, viable, and objective argument that the child also has bodily rights

Yes, and that is the point where it no longer is leeching off of another body's bloodstream to upkeep and build its own.

[Herby]

This again? Why we gotta go through this every few months? Okay yeah it ain't as bad as Vancouvia and his Ponderosa commendaiton but still!

[Westercourt]

there is a logical, viable, and objective argument that the child also has bodily rights

Yes, and that is the point where it no longer is leeching off of another body's bloodstream to upkeep and build its own.

Hmm... I capitulate.