by Dobrobyt » Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:11 pm
by Imperium Anglorum » Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:29 pm
by WA Kitty Kops » Sun Aug 06, 2017 1:00 am
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Violates Reproductive Freedoms.
NERVUN wrote:And my life flashed in front of my eyes while I did and I honestly expected my computer to explode after I entered the warning.
by Dobrobyt » Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:42 am
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Violates Reproductive Freedoms.
by Separatist Peoples » Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:04 am
by Greifenburg » Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:05 am
by Serrus » Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:16 am
Greifenburg wrote:"After comparing Resolution #286 with this proposal, Greifenburg will oppose any attempt of repeal of Reproductive Freedoms, since it already allows for encourengement towards life deliveries and makes the suggestion that the government takes unwanted offspring into its care. It also doesn't forbid to, for example, offer the transfer of the fetus into an artificial womb as a more advanced version of abortion, if the technological level allows it. Alas, I see no reason why the ultimate choice regarding her body shouldn't lie with the woman."
Eastern Raarothorgren wrote:News websites are good and reasonable soruces of information or they would not be on the internet if they were saying things that were incorrect.
Keshiland wrote:I am yes arguing that the 1st 4 are not binding to the states and yes I know that in most Republican states they would ban the freedom of religion and the freedom of essembally but I don't live there and I hate guns!
by Belle Ilse en Terre » Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:21 am
by The Greater Siriusian Domain » Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:10 am
Belle Ilse en Terre wrote:Perhaps you should add a repeals and replaces clause. Also, do not use the first person. Good luck, especially if you are repealing Resolution 286
by Dobrobyt » Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:44 am
Separatist Peoples wrote:Dobrobyt wrote:
However, it would be legal to repeal that bill or modify it. This bill could be switched into a repeal of Reproductive Freedoms, then be put to action.
OOC: No, thats absolutely not the case. It would be illegal to modify Reproductive Freedoms. You have to repeal it and replace it with a separate resolution. And because the WA leans hard to reproductive autonomy, its highly unlikely to succeed.
by Dobrobyt » Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:52 am
by Bananaistan » Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:01 am
by The Greater Siriusian Domain » Sun Aug 06, 2017 1:23 pm
Dobrobyt wrote:Then repeal and replace will happen.
by The Sheika » Sun Aug 06, 2017 1:55 pm
Dobrobyt wrote:Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: No, thats absolutely not the case. It would be illegal to modify Reproductive Freedoms. You have to repeal it and replace it with a separate resolution. And because the WA leans hard to reproductive autonomy, its highly unlikely to succeed.
Then repeal and replace will happen. This is just a draft, however. A start could be writing a repeal with explanations on why to rid of current laws, then create a new bill which enforces new laws.
by Fauxia » Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:07 am
I wish their was a way to modify.Separatist Peoples wrote:Dobrobyt wrote:
However, it would be legal to repeal that bill or modify it. This bill could be switched into a repeal of Reproductive Freedoms, then be put to action.
OOC: No, thats absolutely not the case. It would be illegal to modify Reproductive Freedoms. You have to repeal it and replace it with a separate resolution. And because the WA leans hard to reproductive autonomy, its highly unlikely to succeed.
by Fauxia » Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:09 am
Geese. I had no idea it had been tried that many times.Bananaistan wrote:OOC: It has been tried many times before. Perhaps you should consider an easier start to your GA career. If not, the linked threads will give you an idea of the pitfalls of previous attempts and the depth of feelings regarding Reproductive Freedoms.
by Tzorsland » Mon Aug 07, 2017 1:54 pm
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Violates Reproductive Freedoms.
1. REQUIRES member countries to legalise abortion for cases where:
a) The pregnancy resulted from involuntary sexual activity and/or sexual activity in which at least one of the parties could not legally give consent;
b) Severe foetal abnormality would result in a child being born with an incurable condition which is fatal and/or painful;
c) There is a risk of a life-threatening physical or mental condition which would result in the death or life-long severe disability of the pregnant woman if the pregnancy continued;
by Calladan » Mon Aug 07, 2017 2:57 pm
Dobrobyt wrote:World Assembly Members,
REALIZING that many abortions are done due to unexpected pregnancies and lack of responsibility among parents, yet that there are a certain amount done due to possible mother death. Additionally, we recognize that abortions are the limitations on future human life, and that it is the parent taking control over a child's life.
ACKNOWLEDGING that we must reduce abortions in order to protect the child's future life, yet that we still must have exceptions for rare outcomes of pregnancies.
I present you this bill, which will push the abortion limitations to the proper line:
I. This bill establishes that abortions done due to any other reason except a possible mother death, severe foetal abnormality or pregnancy due to rape shall be a violation throughout member nations.
II. Requiring that nations promote safe sex and discourage abortions except for reasons listed above in all government-funded schools.
III. Requiring that other non-government funded established schools promote safe sex in their education.
IV. Requiring that nations close hospitals which support or offer abortions which do not align with reasons above.
_
I will be happy to hear opinions and additions on this bill. Both sides of issue appreciated.
by Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft » Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:43 am
Dobrobyt wrote:World Assembly Members,
REALIZING that many abortions are done due to unexpected pregnancies and lack of responsibility among parents, yet that there are a certain amount done due to possible mother death. Additionally, we recognize that abortions are the limitations on future human life, and that it is the parent taking control over a child's life.
ACKNOWLEDGING that we must reduce abortions in order to protect the child's future life, yet that we still must have exceptions for rare outcomes of pregnancies.
I present you this bill, which will push the abortion limitations to the proper line:
I. This bill establishes that abortions done due to any other reason except a possible mother death, severe foetal abnormality or pregnancy due to rape shall be a violation throughout member nations.
II. Requiring that nations promote safe sex and discourage abortions except for reasons listed above in all government-funded schools.
III. Requiring that other non-government funded established schools promote safe sex in their education.
IV. Requiring that nations close hospitals which support or offer abortions which do not align with reasons above.
_
I will be happy to hear opinions and additions on this bill. Both sides of issue appreciated.
by Lauchenoiria » Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:50 am
by Dobrobyt » Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:38 pm
Lauchenoiria wrote:This proposal is illegal, as many have already said. If somehow you managed to repeal Reproductive Freedoms, Lauchenoiria would vote against this.
by Dobrobyt » Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:39 pm
Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft wrote:Dobrobyt wrote:World Assembly Members,
REALIZING that many abortions are done due to unexpected pregnancies and lack of responsibility among parents, yet that there are a certain amount done due to possible mother death. Additionally, we recognize that abortions are the limitations on future human life, and that it is the parent taking control over a child's life.
ACKNOWLEDGING that we must reduce abortions in order to protect the child's future life, yet that we still must have exceptions for rare outcomes of pregnancies.
I present you this bill, which will push the abortion limitations to the proper line:
I. This bill establishes that abortions done due to any other reason except a possible mother death, severe foetal abnormality or pregnancy due to rape shall be a violation throughout member nations.
II. Requiring that nations promote safe sex and discourage abortions except for reasons listed above in all government-funded schools.
III. Requiring that other non-government funded established schools promote safe sex in their education.
IV. Requiring that nations close hospitals which support or offer abortions which do not align with reasons above.
_
I will be happy to hear opinions and additions on this bill. Both sides of issue appreciated.
If this is passed I will blatantly disobey this scientifically inaccurate joke of a bill
by Greater Gilead » Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:41 pm
Deropia wrote:Jason can't help but laugh as the scotch bottle, followed soon after by the pie, fly through the air of the chamber. "Ah, this place may be a mad-house...but its the best damn posting I've ever had...".
The Bible Baptist Republic wrote:Ambassador Conklin reads the proposal, blinks twice, and mutters "There ain't enough whiskey to deal with this crap."
by The New California Republic » Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:24 pm
Dobrobyt wrote:Science is not always right. Scientists can filter evidence from one side, keep the other to make new "evidence", and then live off of it.
by The Greater Siriusian Domain » Tue Aug 08, 2017 5:12 pm
1
: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
2
a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study
b : something (such as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge
3
a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method
b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena
4
: a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: The Galactic Supremacy
Advertisement