Rights of the Unborn Child

[Massau]

INTERNATIONAL LAW states that abortion is legal and is to be available in all nations included in the World Assembly.

THIS LAW, however, does not consider the right the unborn child has to life.

MANY COUNTRIES may already have rules regarding abortion, however this proposal wishes to:

-Create a deadline of 12 weeks, after which abortion may not be carried out on request.

-This deadline is extended to 24 weeks if:
a)The birth of this child may endanger the mother's life
b)The baby was conceived as a result of rape
c)There is a great risk that the child will be born with serious mental or physical defects

-After this point it developed enough to be regarded as a child rather than a foetus, giving it the full human rights

ALL COUNTRIES have a right to reduce these deadlines if they deem it necessary to do so.

This is the proposal that I have submitted.

[Phing Phong]

I will back this. 12 weeks is a sensible limit for pregnancies that could have been prevented. However it is a bit short, so you may want to add some more things, and it's a good idea to ask for comment before you submit (if you have already, my mistake).

[Massau]

Looking at various national laws on this i decided that 12 weeks would be a sensible option

[Grays Harbor]

This is not something we could ever support.

[Meekinos]

Faulty to the very core. This shoddy legislation is presumptuous. It assumes that every last single member nation of the World Assembly is a human who shares the VERY same DNA with every other single goddamn human in the world. I'm sorry but no. Just no. Do your research because fixed dates just don't do it. For example, there is Bears Armed, which is run of course by Sentient Bears. Do you honestly believe that your period given for gestation is scientifically sound as a single one-size fits all band-aid? Or that even in humanoid nations that our genetics may have evolved so that the gestation period is different from other species of humanoids? There are too many factors and this legislation is narrow-minded and ill-informed.

[Hirota]

ALL COUNTRIES have a right to reduce these deadlines if they deem it necessary to do so.

Optionality = illegality.

Plus contradiction with previous legislation.

If you can get round those two issues, I'll oppose with all my determination.

[Churchilland]

Good Idea

[South Lorenya]

What about all the sentient beings with a substantially short pregnancy time?
What about all the sentient beings with a substantially longer pregnancy time?
What about all the sentient beings that lay eggs or reproduce with other methods?

[Manticore Reborn]

I have been instructed to lodge our agreement with with the opinions of Ambassador Hirosami Kildarno, Representative of the Supremely Democratic States of Hirota, Ambassador Vasiliki Antoniou of the The Hellenic Republic of Meekinos and our esteemed colleague from Grays Harbor for the record.

--David Hammerer Adjunct to Earl White Haven who has been recalled to New Manticore for consultations with the King.

[Massau]

The bill clearly states that it is

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

. This quite clearly incurs that it is to affect humans. It also states, as you requested about sentient beings with a shorter gestation period, that all deadlines may be reduced if necessary so this would not cause any trouble anyway.

[Massau]

it's a good idea to ask for comment before you submit (if you have already, my mistake).

I realise now that is hould have posted it on the forum before submission, i did not, iinstead only informing my regional delegate and other regional WA members of the proposal.

[Massau]

This is not something we could ever support.

Could I please have a reason for this?

[Manticore Reborn]

The bill clearly states that it is

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

. This quite clearly incurs that it is to affect humans. It also states, as you requested about sentient beings with a shorter gestation period, that all deadlines may be reduced if necessary so this would not cause any trouble anyway.

Although the category may read "human and civil rights" it is assumed to apply to all species which have joined the WA. Resolutions cannot target a specific species.

[Aranoff]

We simply can't support this because a mother's right outweighs the right of the unborn.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I think the topic of Abortion had already been resolved. Adding further detail to the resolution concerned may cause complexities due to member states having differing opinions on abortion.

[Massau]

We simply can't support this because a mother's right outweighs the right of the unborn.

Hence the increase of the deadline to 24 weeks should the birth cause a risk to the mother
All economic problems are visible (for want of a better word) from the start and so fall under the 12 week category

[Massau]

I think the topic of Abortion had already been resolved. Adding further detail to the resolution concerned may cause complexities due to member states having differing opinions on abortion.

This reduces the chance of pregnancy in the first place however does not set deadline for abortion to happen before it violates the unborn childs rights as a human being

[Massau]

An oxford dictionary definition of a child

noun (plural children /ˈtʃɪldr(ə)n/)

*
a young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority

It clearly states that the term child refers to a young human being therefore making this law only applicable to human beings as it is only their rights in question.

[Manticore Reborn]

An oxford dictionary definition of a child

noun (plural children /ˈtʃɪldr(ə)n/)

*
a young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority

It clearly states that the term child refers to a young human being therefore making this law only applicable to human beings as it is only their rights in question.

Again--Resolutions cannot target a specific species. They apply all species that have joined the WA. Also, you need to step outside of the box and realize that this is a game and as a game you cannot take a real life definition from the Oxford Dictionary and apply it to this game.

[Flibbleites]

An oxford dictionary definition of a child

noun (plural children /ˈtʃɪldr(ə)n/)

*
a young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority

It clearly states that the term child refers to a young human being therefore making this law only applicable to human beings as it is only their rights in question.

So basically you're saying, screw all the non-human species in the WA, is that it?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Massau]

No, what I am saying is that it is impossible to create a proposal which uniquely defines all creatures on NationStates whilst remaining definite in terms of deadlines. Therefore the proposal must only include human beings, meaning all other beings must remain using previous WA laws and there own National Laws

[Manticore Reborn]

No, what I am saying is that it is impossible to create a proposal which uniquely defines all creatures on NationStates whilst remaining definite in terms of deadlines. Therefore the proposal must only include human beings, meaning all other beings must remain using previous WA laws and there own National Laws

But you cannot do that. All resolutions must be enforced by all nations regardless of their species. This is game mechanics and cannot be changed. Besides there are 109 resolutions already on the books that appear to satisfy the problems between inter-species issues.

[Flibbleites]

No, what I am saying is that it is impossible to create a proposal which uniquely defines all creatures on NationStates whilst remaining definite in terms of deadlines. Therefore the proposal must only include human beings, meaning all other beings must remain using previous WA laws and there own National Laws

Gee, then maybe that's a clue that you should drop this idea because it's unworkable due to the many species inhabiting WA member nations.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Hirota]

So basically you're saying, screw all the non-human species in the WA, is that it?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[devilsadvocate]Surely by the same logic, you are saying that human rights resolutions simply don't affect non-human species because they are not human.{/devilsadvocate]

[Grays Harbor]

This is not something we could ever support.

Could I please have a reason for this?

You mean besides the fact it is poorly written, presumptuous, narrow-minded twaddle that assumes that we should all be dictated to and mandated into an ill-advised and bigoted "right to life" proposal?

Gee, other than that, we think its just peachy.