[PASSED] Repeal "On Abortion"

[British Starsian Influence]

I'm not saying that we should totally outlaw abortion in all member states, but I am saying that the levels of partisanship in this bill are alarming. For example, in one clause, it references that all qualified physicians be required to perform abortions over religious or moral objections. This is appalling! Love it or hate it, abortion should not and should never be forced upon the individual. For many conservative doctors, performing an abortion is tantamount to infanticide, and no one should be forced to perform murder against their will! Now, the old legislation does have faults, but it is a compromise, and the best we'll be able to get. There is no reason why it should be repealed or expanded upon.

It was already expanded upon several times over, and 'conservative doctors' still would not be forced into providing an abortion as the other resolutions provided methods to access abortion services under most any circumstances. I'm not really seeing what your problem is.

Nor would this resolution affect you, O non-member.

My problem with your point is that "most any" circumstance is not secure enough. If the physician in question truly believes that abortion is wrong, they cannot under any circumstances perform one, even if their job is on the line. And also, look at the last clause. "Confident that the political will of member nations and resolutions GAR #29 "Patient's Rights Act", GAR #286 "Reproductive Freedoms", GAR #499 "Access to Abortion", and GAR #523 "Patient Travel Freedoms" provide for the guarantee of reproductive freedom to all individuals under the jurisdiction of member states," If that was the case, why would we need new legislation? This bill is an attempt to overturn a better thought out and frankly better written alternative.

(By the way, I'm in the WA, just not with my main nation. I'm a defender on a mission right now).

[Godular]

It was already expanded upon several times over, and 'conservative doctors' still would not be forced into providing an abortion as the other resolutions provided methods to access abortion services under most any circumstances. I'm not really seeing what your problem is.

Nor would this resolution affect you, O non-member.

My problem with your point is that "most any" circumstance is not secure enough. If the physician in question truly believes that abortion is wrong, they cannot under any circumstances perform one, even if their job is on the line.

Your objection to this is silly on the practical level. Specializations exist, and if you do not have abortion physicians or some means to direct women to such facilities that provide abortion services, why do you not?

And also, look at the last clause. "Confident that the political will of member nations and resolutions GAR #29 "Patient's Rights Act", GAR #286 "Reproductive Freedoms", GAR #499 "Access to Abortion", and GAR #523 "Patient Travel Freedoms" provide for the guarantee of reproductive freedom to all individuals under the jurisdiction of member states," If that was the case, why would we need new legislation? This bill is an attempt to overturn a better thought out and frankly better written alternative.

'On Abortion' is not an alternative, as it and all the others already exist.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

Oe Ishi: And what is WA now, tyranny by majority? Miss Nysen, if the majority of the WA would decide that all nation states should abolish marriage institution, would you, personally, agree that it should be done?

"If that is indeed the will of the majority of the WA, then our nation will either abide by it and seek to repeal the legislation at the appropriate moment, or choose to resign from the World Assembly. The majority has always decided the course of things in this international community. Minorities have the right to propose and promote legislation that favours them, yet in the end it is a majority vote that determines the course of things regarding WA legislation. If your nation is unable to conform to the will of the majority, then it needs to ask itself whether it should remain a part of this international body."

That’s quite ironic, Ambassador, taking into account how your neo-liberal ideas celebrate the promotion of multiculturalism and tolerance to other opinions, yet when it comes to the conflicts of values and traditions, you are eager to take a hard stance against anyone who disagrees with you even by a small merit.

Now, would you kindly answer my question: “Is the World Assembly a tyranny by majority?”- she would say with a grin on her face,- Because, according to my observations, it has all the qualities of one. It doesn’t care about the opinion of the minority in the slightest. Hell, even our nation- a goddamn country with a literal state religion treats dissidents better, than they are treated in this assembly. And we’re, officially, opposed to democracy, say so... Should we take the textbook example of this situation:” A situation in which a government or other authority democratically supported by a majority of its subjects makes policies or takes actions benefiting that majority, without regard for the rights or welfare of the rest of its subjects.”- she would read from a rather large dictionary that appeared, it seems, out of nowhere.
-Now, wasn’t WA democratically elected? Does it makes policies that benefit the majority on the cost of minority? I suppose, the answers are quite obvious...

[Godular]

"If that is indeed the will of the majority of the WA, then our nation will either abide by it and seek to repeal the legislation at the appropriate moment, or choose to resign from the World Assembly. The majority has always decided the course of things in this international community. Minorities have the right to propose and promote legislation that favours them, yet in the end it is a majority vote that determines the course of things regarding WA legislation. If your nation is unable to conform to the will of the majority, then it needs to ask itself whether it should remain a part of this international body."

That’s quite ironic, Ambassador, taking into account how your neo-liberal ideas celebrate the promotion of multiculturalism and tolerance to other opinions, yet when it comes to the conflicts of values and traditions, you are eager to take a hard stance against anyone who disagrees with you even by a small merit.

Now, would you kindly answer my question: “Is the World Assembly a tyranny by majority?”- she would say with a grin on her face,- Because, according to my observations, it has all the qualities of one. It doesn’t care about the opinion of the minority in the slightest. Hell, even our nation- a goddamn country with a literal state religion treats dissidents better, than they are treated in this assembly. And we’re, officially, opposed to democracy, say so...

"I'd say it loses the 'tyranny' aspect when you can leave whenever you want and you don't particularly lose anything in the doing. Citizens of other tyrannical realms often do not have the capacity to leave, and if they ever do they have to leave a great deal behind and start over wherever they might end up. For you, it would be a simple act of unchecking a box, and we'll just ransack your office for supplies afterwards. Daddy needs a new stapler."

"Also, no. The WA is not democratically elected. Each nation sends a representative of its own choosing, if it chooses to do so at all. There is no election for WA leadership, or any leadership that I am aware of. I'm not even sure who built this place. I tried to look at the records and it was all just eldritch runes."

[Laka Strolistandiler]

That’s quite ironic, Ambassador, taking into account how your neo-liberal ideas celebrate the promotion of multiculturalism and tolerance to other opinions, yet when it comes to the conflicts of values and traditions, you are eager to take a hard stance against anyone who disagrees with you even by a small merit.

Now, would you kindly answer my question: “Is the World Assembly a tyranny by majority?”- she would say with a grin on her face,- Because, according to my observations, it has all the qualities of one. It doesn’t care about the opinion of the minority in the slightest. Hell, even our nation- a goddamn country with a literal state religion treats dissidents better, than they are treated in this assembly. And we’re, officially, opposed to democracy, say so...

"I'd say it loses the 'tyranny' aspect when you can leave whenever you want and you don't particularly lose anything in the doing. Citizens of other tyrannical realms often do not have the capacity to leave, and if they ever do they have to leave a great deal behind and start over wherever they might end up. For you, it would be a simple act of unchecking a box, and we'll just ransack your office for supplies afterwards. Daddy needs a new stapler."

Well, then why are we branded as one? Leaving Laka Strolistandiler is not that hard, however, returning can be quite a challenge...

[Godular]

"I'd say it loses the 'tyranny' aspect when you can leave whenever you want and you don't particularly lose anything in the doing. Citizens of other tyrannical realms often do not have the capacity to leave, and if they ever do they have to leave a great deal behind and start over wherever they might end up. For you, it would be a simple act of unchecking a box, and we'll just ransack your office for supplies afterwards. Daddy needs a new stapler."

Well, then why are we branded as one? Leaving Laka Strolistandiler is not that hard, however, returning can be quite a challenge...

"Here, you can come and go as you please. Just check and uncheck that box as many times as you care to keep getting confirmation letters. I hear tell one bunch did that to resolve an energy crisis. Daddy needs new kindling."

[Laka Strolistandiler]

Well, then why are we branded as one? Leaving Laka Strolistandiler is not that hard, however, returning can be quite a challenge...

"Here, you can come and go as you please. Just check and uncheck that box as many times as you care to keep getting confirmation letters. I hear tell one bunch did that to resolve an energy crisis. Daddy needs new kindling."

Well, *sarcastically* taking into consideration my “enormous” salary of 2.1K N$, you can surely understand why I am against leaving WA. Because if we do I’ll go back to performing technical support at The Ministry for External Matters. Trust me, you don’t have a slightest idea how boring this is...

[Daarwyrth]

"If that is indeed the will of the majority of the WA, then our nation will either abide by it and seek to repeal the legislation at the appropriate moment, or choose to resign from the World Assembly. The majority has always decided the course of things in this international community. Minorities have the right to propose and promote legislation that favours them, yet in the end it is a majority vote that determines the course of things regarding WA legislation. If your nation is unable to conform to the will of the majority, then it needs to ask itself whether it should remain a part of this international body."

That’s quite ironic, Ambassador, taking into account how your neo-liberal ideas celebrate the promotion of multiculturalism and tolerance to other opinions, yet when it comes to the conflicts of values and traditions, you are eager to take a hard stance against anyone who disagrees with you even by a small merit.

Now, would you kindly answer my question: “Is the World Assembly a tyranny by majority?”- she would say with a grin on her face,- Because, according to my observations, it has all the qualities of one. It doesn’t care about the opinion of the minority in the slightest. Hell, even our nation- a goddamn country with a literal state religion treats dissidents better, than they are treated in this assembly. And we’re, officially, opposed to democracy, say so... Should we take the textbook example of this situation:” A situation in which a government or other authority democratically supported by a majority of its subjects makes policies or takes actions benefiting that majority, without regard for the rights or welfare of the rest of its subjects.”- she would read from a rather large dictionary that appeared, it seems, out of nowhere.
-Now, wasn’t WA democratically elected? Does it makes policies that benefit the majority on the cost of minority? I suppose, the answers are quite obvious...

"No one is forcing you to stay. So no, it is not a tyranny by majority. You are free to leave whenever you want, yet when you stay, you abide by the laws that bind this international community.

If outsiders came into your country and became non-compliant with your nation's laws and rules, what would you do to them? Don't bother answering, you'd punish them. Now, imagine a nation comes into this international community, and blatantly defies the laws and rules that have bound this international community long before that nation joined, do you really blame the WA for imposing fines and sanctions on you?

I have said my piece and it has been expressed clearly. Since your nation chooses to remain non-compliant with World Assembly legislation, we choose to no longer engage with your delegation, or maintain any diplomatic channels with your nation.

May the Seas carry reason and wisdom to your shores, Ambassador, because your nation is in dire need of those."

[Laka Strolistandiler]

That’s quite ironic, Ambassador, taking into account how your neo-liberal ideas celebrate the promotion of multiculturalism and tolerance to other opinions, yet when it comes to the conflicts of values and traditions, you are eager to take a hard stance against anyone who disagrees with you even by a small merit.

Now, would you kindly answer my question: “Is the World Assembly a tyranny by majority?”- she would say with a grin on her face,- Because, according to my observations, it has all the qualities of one. It doesn’t care about the opinion of the minority in the slightest. Hell, even our nation- a goddamn country with a literal state religion treats dissidents better, than they are treated in this assembly. And we’re, officially, opposed to democracy, say so... Should we take the textbook example of this situation:” A situation in which a government or other authority democratically supported by a majority of its subjects makes policies or takes actions benefiting that majority, without regard for the rights or welfare of the rest of its subjects.”- she would read from a rather large dictionary that appeared, it seems, out of nowhere.
-Now, wasn’t WA democratically elected? Does it makes policies that benefit the majority on the cost of minority? I suppose, the answers are quite obvious...

"No one is forcing you to stay. So no, it is not a tyranny by majority. You are free to leave whenever you want, yet when you stay, you abide by the laws that bind this international community.

If outsiders came into your country and became non-compliant with your nation's laws and rules, what would you do to them? Don't bother answering, you'd punish them. Now, imagine a nation comes into this international community, and blatantly defies the laws and rules that have bound this international community long before that nation joined, do you really blame the WA for imposing fines and sanctions on you?

I have said my piece and it has been expressed clearly. Since your nation chooses to remain non-compliant with World Assembly legislation, we choose to no longer engage with your delegation, or maintain any diplomatic channels with your nation.

May the Seas carry reason and wisdom to your shores, Ambassador, because your nation is in dire need of those."

OOC: Look, I just want to say I’m sorry if I took a lot of your time. I mean judging by your text and it’s language you really hate me now, do you... Sorry.

[Godular]

"Here, you can come and go as you please. Just check and uncheck that box as many times as you care to keep getting confirmation letters. I hear tell one bunch did that to resolve an energy crisis. Daddy needs new kindling."

Well, *sarcastically* taking into consideration my “enormousl salary of 2.1K N$, you can surely understand why I am against leaving WA. Because if we do I’ll go back to performing technical support at The Ministry for External Matters. Trust me, you don’t have a slightest idea how boring this is...

"I used to be a sales rep for a robotics company that nobody nowadays even knows exists-- for centuries-- just because we keep the damn thing running for shits and giggles. I learned how to do crosswords in braille just for the hell of it. I do agree this is a welcome change of pace.

"The point is though that this assembly functions as what you might call a 'tyranny by majority' simply because the more conservative nations have all decided that they'd rather be fishing. Amusingly, it was largely over the astonishingly frequent attempts to repeal 'Reproductive Freedoms' that caused many of them to throw their proverbial hats down in disgust before storming off to the Bass Pro Shop on their way to the exit. One could just as easily blame them for the extremely partisan political bent of this assembly."

[Laka Strolistandiler]

Well, *sarcastically* taking into consideration my “enormousl salary of 2.1K N$, you can surely understand why I am against leaving WA. Because if we do I’ll go back to performing technical support at The Ministry for External Matters. Trust me, you don’t have a slightest idea how boring this is...

"I used to be a sales rep for a robotics company that nobody nowadays even knows exists-- for centuries-- just because we keep the damn thing running for shits and giggles. I learned how to do crosswords in braille just for the hell of it. I do agree this is a welcome change of pace.

"The point is though that this assembly functions as what you might call a 'tyranny by majority' simply because the more conservative nations have all decided that they'd rather be fishing. Amusingly, it was largely over the astonishingly frequent attempts to repeal 'Reproductive Freedoms' that caused many of them to throw their proverbial hats down in disgust before storming off to the Bass Pro Shop on their way to the exit. One could just as easily blame them for the extremely partisan political bent of this assembly."

Well, at very lest your salary, I suppose, is enough to afford a normal car, not that used vehicle crap that my supreriors issue me...
Well, the problem is that it’s my job to represent one of this nations. Our masters, the United Federation (OOC: a nation that has a far bigger economy than LS and to which Laka is effectively a client state) left the WA just because of Reproductive Freedoms. They actually are paying us to stay in WA to represent their interests. Well, tell me ‘bout things you do for your cryptocolonial masters...

[Daarwyrth]

"No one is forcing you to stay. So no, it is not a tyranny by majority. You are free to leave whenever you want, yet when you stay, you abide by the laws that bind this international community.

If outsiders came into your country and became non-compliant with your nation's laws and rules, what would you do to them? Don't bother answering, you'd punish them. Now, imagine a nation comes into this international community, and blatantly defies the laws and rules that have bound this international community long before that nation joined, do you really blame the WA for imposing fines and sanctions on you?

I have said my piece and it has been expressed clearly. Since your nation chooses to remain non-compliant with World Assembly legislation, we choose to no longer engage with your delegation, or maintain any diplomatic channels with your nation.

May the Seas carry reason and wisdom to your shores, Ambassador, because your nation is in dire need of those."

OOC: Look, I just want to say I’m sorry if I took a lot of your time. I mean judging by your text and it’s language you really hate me now, do you... Sorry.

OOC: My character has a dislike of your nation. I personally don't hate others that easily. RP and OOC are two separate things for me. I simply disagree with you, but disagreement isn't immediately hatred. Do I think playing a non-compliant nation is unwise? I do, but you're free to play your nation however you like.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: The WA is absolutely a tyranny by majority. 51% of total votes will always beat 49%. Nobody has been able to explain why the 51% should restrain itself.

[New Jewlan]

My nation stands firmly against the moral rot imposed by The Lodge!
Pro-lifer community, where art thou?

[Quebecshire]

Pro-lifer community, where art thou?

In the insignificant minority of the voting population.

[Daarwyrth]

My nation stands firmly against the moral rot imposed by The Lodge!
Pro-lifer community, where art thou?

Vyn Nysen: "Your nation can also stand against it in silence."

[Ardiveds]

My nation stands firmly against the moral rot imposed by The Lodge!
Pro-lifer community, where art thou?

OOC: Considering AtA passed with such overwhelming majority, mostly outside the WA.

[Outer Sparta]

My nation stands firmly against the moral rot imposed by The Lodge!
Pro-lifer community, where art thou?

The pro-life community on NS is a minority. Also if you don't want to abide by the WA's standards on abortion, you can always leave.

[Friberia]

My nation stands firmly against the moral rot imposed by The Lodge!
Pro-lifer community, where art thou?

The pro-life community on NS is a minority. Also if you don't want to abide by the WA's standards on abortion, you can always leave.

Even if you're right, I don't consider ethically correct the idea of people going around killing fetuses because they didn't used condoms, you know?

[Outer Sparta]

The pro-life community on NS is a minority. Also if you don't want to abide by the WA's standards on abortion, you can always leave.

Even if you're right, I don't consider ethically correct the idea of people going around killing fetuses because they didn't used condoms, you know?

Not what this repeal is about. Actually read into the GA's abortion-related resolutions to get a sense of the content at hand.

[Sincluda]

It's phenomenal how many people saw "Abortion" a few replies, and then spewed their opinions without reading the proposal, or even its main point.

[Outer Sparta]

It's phenomenal how many people saw "Abortion" a few replies, and then spewed their opinions without reading the proposal, or even its main point.

Guessing they don't have any sense of the abortion debate in the context of the GA. Seemingly just saying "abortions bad" without even engaging the content.

[Godular]

It's phenomenal how many people saw "Abortion" a few replies, and then spewed their opinions without reading the proposal, or even its main point.

Why, it's almost as if some folks are using this as a surrogate for posting in the ACTUAL abortion thread...

[The Central Union of Nation States]

I believe we should be expand upon GAR# 128, so that we do not outweigh an individual's reproductive right and also respect a doctor's moral or religious disagreement with abortion. An idea that may help this balance is to essentially have the ones who are willing to do the abortions (or vice versa) have wither a placard or sticker or something in their office to state that they are willing or not willing and should they break what category they are under and infringe on someone's reproductive rights then they should be penalized for infringement. They process should also be easy for if a doctor wishes to change their mind to either start performing them or stopping to perform them though with limitations so that they can not flip flop on a daily, weekly, monthly, etc. basis. Maybe like only once a year but some sort of limitation per change? On top of this a global website or a requirement for countries to have a website indicating doctor's that will perform abortions to exist and be updated on a weekly if not daily basis.

I believe that this might be a solution or something that would help this along while respecting both reproductive and religious rights.

[Godular]

I believe we should be expand upon GAR# 128, so that we do not outweigh an individual's reproductive right and also respect a doctor's moral or religious disagreement with abortion. An idea that may help this balance is to essentially have the ones who are willing to do the abortions (or vice versa) have wither a placard or sticker or something in their office to state that they are willing or not willing and should they break what category they are under and infringe on someone's reproductive rights then they should be penalized for infringement. They process should also be easy for if a doctor wishes to change their mind to either start performing them or stopping to perform them though with limitations so that they can not flip flop on a daily, weekly, monthly, etc. basis. Maybe like only once a year but some sort of limitation per change? On top of this a global website or a requirement for countries to have a website indicating doctor's that will perform abortions to exist and be updated on a weekly if not daily basis.

I believe that this might be a solution or something that would help this along while respecting both reproductive and religious rights.

"You might want to look at the proposal about 'Conscientious Objection to Abortion', then. Making suggestions about what should be added to existing abortion policy in the Assembly is an exercise in futility when speaking about a repeal."