[ABANDONNED] Rights of the Unborn

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

The idea of this was kind of inspired by something I read in the news.

Apparently the US passed laws legalizing abortion up until the moment of birth.

This resolution would prohibit late term abortion that is not under the pretense of rape, incest, or at the expense of the mother's life.

Reasonable, I think, but not radical by any means.

The General Assembly,

Acknowledging the practice of abortion as the ending of the life of a fetus in the womb of a mother,

Understanding the practice of late-term abortion to be the killing/termination of a fetus in the third trimester of a pregnancy,

Believing while in many cases is a woman has a right to choose a point comes at which the fetus must be protected,

Hereby,

1. Declares that late-term abortion will be prohibited by this august assembly save in cases of:
   
   
   1. Rape,
      
      
   2. Incest,
      
      
   3. Danger to the mother's’ life presented by the fetus,
2. Prohibits the use of the term “clump of cells” to describe a fetus in official documentation or to mislead,
   
   
3. Sees that all abortions be carried out in a certified clinic under sanitary condition,
   
   
4. Believes if the mother wishes to keep the fetus if it remains alive after remove from her body in the process of an abortion she has the right to cease the continuation of the procedure and keep the baby,

Wishes later legislation will address the issues of abortion of a fetus with a heartbeat,

Establishes the above implementing the Rights of the Unborn Act.

Comments? I think it is pretty moderate.

I need help with some phrasing, however.

[Wallenburg]

Again, as SP said, look at GAR#286. This proposal idea directly contradicts existing abortion law.

[Borovan3]

viewtopic.php?p=19281778#p19281778
I think reproductive freedoms suffices as third trimester is riskier so the medical providers have their own discretion

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Problem everyone is saying: GAR #286

Solution: Repeal GAR #286

I will have a repeal draft up by the end of the day.

[Wallenburg]

Problem everyone is saying: GAR #286

Solution: Repeal GAR #286

I will have a repeal draft up by the end of the day.

Good luck, I guess. You'll need a ton of it.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Problem everyone is saying: GAR #286

Solution: Repeal GAR #286

I will have a repeal draft up by the end of the day.

Good luck, I guess. You'll need a ton of it.

I think the term 'reproductive freedoms' is very misleading too.

I want to replace it with something that at least conditionally protects the rights of the unborn like this.

[Tinfect]

"This legislation is abhorrent, and illegal," said Feren, "I highly suggest that this legislation be dropped, preferably into a trashcan, at the earliest available opportunity. "

[Sierra Lyricalia]

Apparently the US passed laws legalizing abortion up until the moment of birth.

OOC: Wrong.

This resolution would prohibit late term abortion that is not under the pretense of rape, incest, or at the expense of the mother's life.

Reasonable, I think, but not radical by any means.

OOC: That would not only contradict GAR #286, but also GAR #128. Also, wrong again

1. Declares that late-term abortion will be prohibited by this august assembly save in cases of:
   
   
   1. Rape,
      
   2. Incest,
      
   3. Danger to the mother's’ life presented by the fetus,

Contradiction GAR #128

Prohibits the use of the term “clump of cells” to describe a fetus in official documentation or to mislead,

Contradiction GAR #29, #436

Sees that all abortions be carried out in a certified clinic under sanitary condition,

Duplication #128, #286

Believes if the mother wishes to keep the fetus if it remains alive after remove from her body in the process of an abortion she has the right to cease the continuation of the procedure and keep the baby,

This clause does literally nothing. It's not even as strong as "encourages member nations to..." and should either be beefed up or moved to the preamble.

Wishes later legislation will address the issues of abortion of a fetus with a heartbeat,

Ditto.

Establishes the above implementing the Rights of the Unborn Act.

Unnecessary but acceptable rhetorical flourish.

Comments? I think it is pretty moderate.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Apparently the US passed laws legalizing abortion up until the moment of birth.

OOC: Wrong.

This resolution would prohibit late term abortion that is not under the pretense of rape, incest, or at the expense of the mother's life.

Reasonable, I think, but not radical by any means.

OOC: That would not only contradict GAR #286, but also GAR #128. Also, wrong again

1. Declares that late-term abortion will be prohibited by this august assembly save in cases of:
   
   
   1. Rape,
      
   2. Incest,
      
   3. Danger to the mother's’ life presented by the fetus,

Contradiction GAR #128

Prohibits the use of the term “clump of cells” to describe a fetus in official documentation or to mislead,

Contradiction GAR #29, #436

Sees that all abortions be carried out in a certified clinic under sanitary condition,

Duplication #128, #286

Believes if the mother wishes to keep the fetus if it remains alive after remove from her body in the process of an abortion she has the right to cease the continuation of the procedure and keep the baby,

This clause does literally nothing. It's not even as strong as "encourages member nations to..." and should either be beefed up or moved to the preamble.

Wishes later legislation will address the issues of abortion of a fetus with a heartbeat,

Ditto.

Establishes the above implementing the Rights of the Unborn Act.

Unnecessary but acceptable rhetorical flourish.

Comments? I think it is pretty moderate.

I am so damn confused right now.

So a lot of pro-death stuff made it through the assembly apparently. Good God.

I have a lot of work to do.

---

I will see if I can put this legislation in some loophole so that it can be legal but not have to repeal 286.

I got a whole headache coming.

[Tinfect]

I will see if I can put this legislation in some loophole so that it can be legal but not have to repeal 286.

OOC:
Or, you could not, and not fuck with reproductive rights and save us all the headache of another abortion debacle!

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

I will see if I can put this legislation in some loophole so that it can be legal but not have to repeal 286.

OOC:
Or, you could not, and not fuck with reproductive rights and save us all the headache of another abortion debacle!

Sitting back while carnage happens isn't part of my moral philosophy. I am an activist for human rights.

[Tinfect]

Sitting back while carnage happens isn't part of my moral philosophy. I am an activist for human rights.

OOC:
Good, and as someone who cares about human rights, you'll let people's reproductive rights and bodily autonomy go un-fucked with right? Right?

[Kenmoria]

“I am opposed to this measure, mainly since it will never pass and the only thing that will come out of this is a headache. This assembly is very pro-choice, and will never consider repealing GA #286 or GA #128. Any attempt to do so will ultimately fail, as has been demonstrated by the inordinate number of tries that happen pretty much bimonthly; the only possible exception to this would be to pass even stronger pro-choice legislation.

I’m sorry, but the idea is doomed from the outset. Also, leaving aside the implausibility, I’m opposed anyway, since the abortion industry won’t be able to run as well if their main source of trade is restricted.”

[Mundiferrum]

We ourselves are a very pro-life nation, but considering how complicated this issue is, and how the decisions of the WA are out of our hands, we decided to pump up our spiritual and psychological services instead. We agree that abortion *is* murder, but in a lot of ways it is like war, albeit war against the very nation of humanity; as such, we must work to preserve the hearts, minds, and souls of those its survivors, who, however guilty, will not be rejected by the Lord. Why can't our fellow nations recognize the same? That this fight is not only a lost cause, but that to continue it will only increase the death and suffering count?

We are thoroughly opposed. Our nation was witness to the fracas that established many of this assembly's resolutions on abortion, and we do not want to witness that same chaos return.

[Falcania]

So a lot of pro-death stuff made it through the assembly apparently. Good God.

I have a lot of work to do.

While the people of Falcania do not give birth to live young and as such view the topic of abortion with a detached curiosity, our understanding is that by the third trimester of a human pregnancy, the prospective parents are planning to have a child, and as such, do not have third trimester abortions because they no longer want to have a child, but because the alternative to having a third trimester abortion would pose a serious risk. Our understanding is that even in this age of scientific progress, childbirth still constitutes a risk to the life of the mother, and there are a range of complications that can drastically increase that risk.

It is our conclusion that nobody has a third trimester abortion because they want to, but because very often it is a tragic choice between the life of the mother or the chance of a successful birth, and we do not see how it is possibly humane or just that this difficult and regrettable situation should come with any sort of criminal penalty.

[Desmosthenes and Burke]

We wish the authoring delegation luck in ending this genocide. We will vote accordingly, but we fear the fanatical fringe of the global left holds far too much power here to be successful in ending the inhumane slaughter of the innocent. You may wish to consult with the honorable representative of United Massachusetts.

[Araraukar]

"While of course wishing to avoid another trainwreck on the abortion topic, I'd like to point out that comprehensive sex education of all youth below the reproductive age, access to free and unjudgemental birth control, and progressive support services in case of the individual choosing to give the baby up for adoption after birth, have all but eliminated the need for abortions in Araraukar. Abortions remain easily obtained, of course, but there just aren't many unplanned pregnancies anymore."

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Sitting back while carnage happens isn't part of my moral philosophy. I am an activist for human rights.

OOC:
Good, and as someone who cares about human rights, you'll let people's reproductive rights and bodily autonomy go un-fucked with right? Right?

Bodily autonomy? So surely you believe the fetus has autonomy of his or her life or death, right? Right?

Research shows 100% of pro-choice activists were not aborted.

[The New Bluestocking Homeland]

Research shows 100% of pro-choice activists were not aborted.

Hackneyed clichés like that are worthy of but one response...

[Despoticania]

This proposal is nothing but conservative idiocy and will be treated as such.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

This proposal is nothing but conservative idiocy and will be treated as such.

Thats not very nice. What if I said "GAR #286 is nothing but liberal idiocy and will be treated as such."?

Have a little respect.

[Despoticania]

This proposal is nothing but conservative idiocy and will be treated as such.

Thats not very nice. What if I said "GAR #286 is nothing but liberal idiocy and will be treated as such."?

Have a little respect.

I see no reason to respect proposals based on emotional, scientifically-disproven fallacies stemming from an outdated religious dogma.

Your proposal will fail like all other similar proposals before it. Don't even try to pretend otherwise.

[Bears Armed]

I think the term 'reproductive freedoms' is very misleading too.

OOC:I actually challenged its legality because of that, under the rule that proposals' contents must match their titles and that proposal was actually about the freedom not to reproduce , but the Mods -- who were still making the legality decisions at that point -- ruled against that challenge.

[The New Bluestocking Homeland]

I think the term 'reproductive freedoms' is very misleading too.

OOC:I actually challenged its legality because of that, under the rule that proposals' contents must match their titles and that proposal was actually about the freedom not to reproduce , but the Mods -- who were still making the legality decisions at that point -- ruled against that challenge.

Reproductive Freedoms does exactly what it says on the tin. It puts the right over whether to reproduce -- or not -- in the woman's hands.

The definition of reproductive freedoms (it'll have to do for a working definition) is not only limited to the freedom to reproduce but also the freedom to choose to not reproduce. No individual is prevented from reproducing if they so wish, nor compelled if they would choose not to.

How is that misleading?

As for this proposal: opposed to any attempt to compel women to endure unwanted pregnancies, including any and all repeal attempts of #286.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Opposed. A woman has the right to assert dominion over her body, regardless of the inconvenience to others."