NationStates

Separatist Peoples wrote:

Kuwi wrote:
Legallity can be changed though, and biology can not.
I say if our society has the artificial idea of human rights that should atleast be consistent to all innocent members of our species...or to a lesser extent the innocent citizens of a nation.

"The biological dispositions of fetuses are irrelevant. There is more utility derived from permitting abortion than barring it. In the balance of rights, the rights of an extant, present person trump those of an uncertain potential."

Rights of the present person to do what?
Kill their child they had because their stupid condom broke so they can be a flashy cheesy role model In whatever field they think has too many men existing in it?
Mothers and Fathers need to learn to be responsible and know when they have sex that birth control methods are not fool proof.

Harthis wrote:I am 100% behind this proposal. Abortion must be stopped.

Except when the fetus is already dead or dying right?

Kuwi wrote:

Separatist Peoples wrote:
"The biological dispositions of fetuses are irrelevant. There is more utility derived from permitting abortion than barring it. In the balance of rights, the rights of an extant, present person trump those of an uncertain potential."

Rights of the present person to do what?
Kill their child they had because their stupid condom broke so they can be a flashy cheesy role model In whatever field they think has too many men existing in it?
Mothers and Fathers need to learn to be responsible and know when they have sex that birth control methods are not fool proof.

I think Separatist Peoples is talking about a fetus that’s a part of a woman’s body, not a child that the woman has already had.

Thinking that qualified women should be represented in a field of work does not automatically entail also thinking that qualified men should not be represented in that same field. After all, the process of women entering the workforce has not caused the vast majority of men to be ejected from it.

I agree with your comment on responsibility.

Kuwi wrote:

Separatist Peoples wrote:
"The biological dispositions of fetuses are irrelevant. There is more utility derived from permitting abortion than barring it. In the balance of rights, the rights of an extant, present person trump those of an uncertain potential."

Rights of the present person to do what?
Kill their child they had because their stupid condom broke so they can be a flashy cheesy role model In whatever field they think has too many men existing in it?
Mothers and Fathers need to learn to be responsible and know when they have sex that birth control methods are not fool proof.

“Whether you like it or not, getting an abortion IS taking responsibility. You’ve less than no right to judge a woman’s situation for seeking such services, and your judgemental little quip demonstrates this most unambiguously.

“These repeal efforts are a seasonal affair, and have been for many a year. The law still stands, and those who disagree with it will just have to be creative in their observation of the law. Honestly, a little innovation might do your collective sticks in the mud a bit of good. Achieve your objective WITHOUT being moralistic dingbats about it? Shock and surprise.”

Kuwi wrote:

Separatist Peoples wrote:
"Perhaps biologically. Legally, they are distinct."

Legallity can be changed though, and biology can not.
I say if our society has the artificial idea of human rights that should atleast be consistent to all innocent members of our species...or to a lesser extent the innocent citizens of a nation.

“Have any of the WA laws defined ‘innocence’ for us?”

Edited to add: DAMMIT I FORGOT TO SWITCH TO MY ACTUAL WA NATION... oh well, just pretend I’m The Unfounded with the flag of the Witch King of Angmar making a :3

Kuwi wrote:

The Unfounded wrote:
“Denying women control over their own bodies strikes me as the greater ‘evil’. If you dislike the idea, there are ways to encourage live births that do not involve altering existing WA legislation. You are in point of fact specifically encouraged to do so.

“The law is fine. The problem’s with you.”

What about the baby’s right to it’s body? It didn’t decide to show up, it can’t help it.

There, switched over. Apologies for my responses being out of order.

“It isn’t violating the rights of the ‘baby’, even if we treat it as a person, if we utilize necessary force to remove it from another person’s property and prevent it from further harming another person. Rest assured, even a simple violation of personal space—if not consented to— is sufficient to warrant a defensive response.

“If I let you shake my hand and you refuse to let go after propriety is satisfied, a broken hand will be the best of the possible outcomes. That being said, focus on the draft, not your fuzzy kitten fetus visions. We’ve only been yelling at y’all over this for the last ten minutes.”

IC: "While abortions are very rare in Araraukar, thanks to extensive sexual education, free pregnancy prevention items being distributed without asking for age of the person involved, family planning being a requirement, and parental licence - in which the applicant or applicants must demonstrate their ability to take care of a baby and a child, pass a childcare and child psychology courses, as well as prove that they have a good home and stable family situation to offer - being the requirement on being allowed to keep the child after giving birth to it, but also having made adopting out a child you've given birth to, easy for everyone involved - as long as parental licences have been acquired - as well as extensive welfare support for anyone with a legally obtained baby... Even with all of this taken into account, our grand nation would not entertain the thought of removing the international protection of the right to have abortions from all individuals in existence. It is as much an invasion of privacy as would incarceration for the rest of your life be, when you've done nothing wrong and are completely sane and safe to yourself and others."

OOC: Still no support. Fetus's rights do not trump mother's rights.

Kuwi wrote:

Separatist Peoples wrote:
"The biological dispositions of fetuses are irrelevant. There is more utility derived from permitting abortion than barring it. In the balance of rights, the rights of an extant, present person trump those of an uncertain potential."

Rights of the present person to do what?
Kill their child they had because their stupid condom broke so they can be a flashy cheesy role model In whatever field they think has too many men existing in it?
Mothers and Fathers need to learn to be responsible and know when they have sex that birth control methods are not fool proof.

"Sure, if they want. Another model is infinitely more useful to society than an unwanted child and an unwilling parent. Unwilling parents are poor parents, and unwanted children statistically become a drain on the state. Society is benefitted in the short and long run by permitting abortion. You don't like it, then dont get one."

Ladies and gentlemen, the delegation tabling this proposal were very clear in their request that this not be used as a forum for discussing the ethics of abortion. We should instead concentrate here on the workings of the legislation being proposed.

Uan aa Boa wrote:Ladies and gentlemen, the delegation tabling this proposal were very clear in their request that this not be used as a forum for discussing the ethics of abortion. We should instead concentrate here on the workings of the legislation being proposed.

Thank you.

Whilst reading the draft and through the law it is meant to repeal, Alexis’ eyebrows quirk up.

“Hey, where does 286 say anything about requiring parental consent? Am I missing something here?”

edited:

“Wait, yeah I missed it. Erm, I actually think 286 addresses that concern itself. I don’t really see a conflict in that scenario. It is good that you mentioned the relevant legal reference. It was covered up by the FOURTH DAMN ON ABORTION REPEAL TO BE HANDED OUT IN THE PAST HOUR... could somebody please tell the representatives from New Gerji to draft their shit before they throw it at the wall?”

United New England wrote:

Kuwi wrote:
Rights of the present person to do what?
Kill their child they had because their stupid condom broke so they can be a flashy cheesy role model In whatever field they think has too many men existing in it?
Mothers and Fathers need to learn to be responsible and know when they have sex that birth control methods are not fool proof.

I think Separatist Peoples is talking about a fetus that’s a part of a woman’s body, not a child that the woman has already had.

Thinking that qualified women should be represented in a field of work does not automatically entail also thinking that qualified men should not be represented in that same field. After all, the process of women entering the workforce has not caused the vast majority of men to be ejected from it.

I agree with your comment on responsibility.

The fetus is not part of the woman’s body, it’s inside it but not part of it.

Separatist Peoples wrote:

Kuwi wrote:
Rights of the present person to do what?
Kill their child they had because their stupid condom broke so they can be a flashy cheesy role model In whatever field they think has too many men existing in it?
Mothers and Fathers need to learn to be responsible and know when they have sex that birth control methods are not fool proof.

"Sure, if they want. Another model is infinitely more useful to society than an unwanted child and an unwilling parent. Unwilling parents are poor parents, and unwanted children statistically become a drain on the state. Society is benefitted in the short and long run by permitting abortion. You don't like it, then dont get one."

Actually it just helps lower the birth rate making the country more dependent on immigration and automation. And it’s not a drain on the state if you don’t have a welfare system in the first place.

Araraukar wrote:IC: "While abortions are very rare in Araraukar, thanks to extensive sexual education, free pregnancy prevention items being distributed without asking for age of the person involved, family planning being a requirement, and parental licence - in which the applicant or applicants must demonstrate their ability to take care of a baby and a child, pass a childcare and child psychology courses, as well as prove that they have a good home and stable family situation to offer - being the requirement on being allowed to keep the child after giving birth to it, but also having made adopting out a child you've given birth to, easy for everyone involved - as long as parental licences have been acquired - as well as extensive welfare support for anyone with a legally obtained baby... Even with all of this taken into account, our grand nation would not entertain the thought of removing the international protection of the right to have abortions from all individuals in existence. It is as much an invasion of privacy as would incarceration for the rest of your life be, when you've done nothing wrong and are completely sane and safe to yourself and others."

OOC: Still no support. Fetus's rights do not trump mother's rights.

They don’t but they should

Harthis wrote:I am 100% behind this proposal. Abortion must be stopped.

"...Votes are votes, I suppose."

Kuwi wrote:The fetus is not part of the woman’s body, it’s inside it but not part of it.

Kuwi wrote:Actually it just helps lower the birth rate making the country more dependent on immigration and automation. And it’s not a drain on the state if you don’t have a welfare system in the first place.

Kuwi wrote:They don’t but they should

OOC: You do know you can quote several posts in one, right?

Kuwi wrote:

Separatist Peoples wrote:
"Sure, if they want. Another model is infinitely more useful to society than an unwanted child and an unwilling parent. Unwilling parents are poor parents, and unwanted children statistically become a drain on the state. Society is benefitted in the short and long run by permitting abortion. You don't like it, then dont get one."

Actually it just helps lower the birth rate making the country more dependent on immigration and automation. And it’s not a drain on the state if you don’t have a welfare system in the first place.

"You are required to have a system that meets minimal welfare requirements in the WA. Material basics of healthcare and access to sanitation. I imagine basics for food and water as well, though I'd have to research to be sure. Further, your argument assumes that people who choose to have abortions will never have children at a later time, or that enough people will make that choice. Neither is a necessary proposition in the logical equation, and therefore your argument collapses.

"And you still haven't noted why we should bother accepting input from a nation that won't comply anyway? If you won't comply with WA mandates, then why should we compromise with you?"

Kuwi wrote:

United New England wrote:
I think Separatist Peoples is talking about a fetus that’s a part of a woman’s body, not a child that the woman has already had.

Thinking that qualified women should be represented in a field of work does not automatically entail also thinking that qualified men should not be represented in that same field. After all, the process of women entering the workforce has not caused the vast majority of men to be ejected from it.

I agree with your comment on responsibility.

The fetus is not part of the woman’s body, it’s inside it but not part of it.

Merriam-Webster’s first definition of “inside” is “an interior or internal part or place : the part within”.

United New England wrote:

Kuwi wrote:
The fetus is not part of the woman’s body, it’s inside it but not part of it.

Merriam-Webster’s first definition of “inside” is “an interior or internal part or place : the part within”.

An what are the other definitions?

Separatist Peoples wrote:

Kuwi wrote:

Actually it just helps lower the birth rate making the country more dependent on immigration and automation. And it’s not a drain on the state if you don’t have a welfare system in the first place.

"You are required to have a system that meets minimal welfare requirements in the WA. Material basics of healthcare and access to sanitation. I imagine basics for food and water as well, though I'd have to research to be sure. Further, your argument assumes that people who choose to have abortions will never have children at a later time, or that enough people will make that choice. Neither is a necessary proposition in the logical equation, and therefore your argument collapses.

"And you still haven't noted why we should bother accepting input from a nation that won't comply anyway? If you won't comply with WA mandates, then why should we compromise with you?"

Could you show me what that resolution is?

This...this is why I left the WA, I like my Salted nukes, Child Soldiers, state run Drug ring, and near total control of my populace.

Kuwi wrote:

Harthis wrote:I am 100% behind this proposal. Abortion must be stopped.

Except when the fetus is already dead or dying right?

Of course.

Parcia wrote:This...this is why I left the WA, I like my Salted nukes, Child Soldiers, state run Drug ring, and near total control of my populace.

It’s why I Chose the smallest and least important of my nations to join WA
Borinsa and Guilaza are FREE

Kuwi wrote:

Parcia wrote:This...this is why I left the WA, I like my Salted nukes, Child Soldiers, state run Drug ring, and near total control of my populace.

It’s why I Chose the smallest and least important of my nations to join WA
Borinsa and Guilaza are FREE

Voluntarily entered a multinational organization that can be entered and left at any time for any reason or no reason at all; claims the nation doing so does not possess the same level of freedom as their other nations.

The cognitive dissonance is quite apropos. It would be nice to refrain from OOC chatter in an RP thread, though. And yes this is an RP thread.

The Unfounded wrote:

Kuwi wrote:
It’s why I Chose the smallest and least important of my nations to join WA
Borinsa and Guilaza are FREE

Voluntarily entered a multinational organization that can be entered and left at any time for any reason or no reason at all; claims the nation doing so does not possess the same level of freedom as their other nations.

The cognitive dissonance is quite apropos. It would be nice to refrain from OOC chatter in an RP thread, though. And yes this is an RP thread.

Sorry,
Kuwi isn’t up to WA code merely because it just joined and hasn’t applied it all yet

Kuwi wrote:

The Unfounded wrote:
Voluntarily entered a multinational organization that can be entered and left at any time for any reason or no reason at all; claims the nation doing so does not possess the same level of freedom as their other nations.

The cognitive dissonance is quite apropos. It would be nice to refrain from OOC chatter in an RP thread, though. And yes this is an RP thread.

Sorry,
Kuwi isn’t up to WA code merely because it just joined and hasn’t applied it all yet

OOC: Then you're crowing about nothing.