Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Welcome to The Rejected Realms

Government:

Delegate: Wabbitslayah
Officer: Frattastan (Foreign Affairs)
Officer: Marilyn Manson Freaks (Outreach)
Officer: PowerPAOK (Media)
Officer: Relfa (Culture)

Other Officials:

Speaker: Vulturret
RRA High Commander: Frattastan
RRA Commander: Guy
RRA Commander: Wopruthien
Welcome to The Rejected Realms, NationStates' ejection-free zone!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you can only view some areas of the board and you can only post in the Troubleshooting and Suggestions forum. If you register an account, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customising your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Register now!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Repeal "Reproductive Freedoms"
Topic Started: Nov 23 2015, 12:44 PM (298 Views)
Guy
Member Avatar
Old Admin Slave
Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #286: Reproductive Freedoms (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The General Assembly,

Affirming its recognition of reproductive rights and its responsibility to protect these rights,

Mindful, however, that there are reasonable and relevant interests in reducing abortions in certain circumstances that are prohibited by GAR#286 absolutely,

Regretting that GAR#286 prevents meaningful and necessary action against sex-selective abortion - a practice that often leads to crippling imbalances in gender demographics and exacerbates social gender inequality - undermining its enduring commitment to promoting social equality,

Understanding that the notion of terminating pregnancies up until the infant is birthed, which is permitted by GAR#286, poses a serious and legitimate ethical concern to many member nations,

Regarding GAR#286 as an immature and reckless exercise of World Assembly authority that does not reflect the legitimate underpinnings behind the right to reproductive choice,

Believing that such a radical approach to an issue as sensitive and divisive as reproductive choice is inconsistent with its extant commitment towards international cooperation,

Desiring a more moderate and refined approach to reproductive rights,

Hereby repeals GAR#286, "Reproductive Freedoms."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Guy
Member Avatar
Old Admin Slave
Nay.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
frattastan
Member Avatar
Dirty Spammer
Nay
In this world there are two kinds of people: those with loaded guns and those who dig. I dig.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banned: Chester Pearson
Member Avatar
Resouluton Author Extraordinaire
Aye. The issue of abortion is not an international issue.
The Right Honourable Chester B. Pearson,

Prime Minister, United Federation of Canada

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Evolu Tanis
Member Avatar
Epistemological Terrorist
Against, but not passionately.

Here lies a toppled god.
His fall was not a small one.
We did but build his pedestal -
A narrow and a tall one.
  • Tleilaxu Epigram
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Christian Democrats
Member Avatar
HMSM James II
For.

Although I disagree with this proposal's endorsement of (anti-) "reproductive rights" and (anti-) "reproductive choice."
"I was born free and desire to continue so."

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpiderJerusalem
Member Avatar
Poster
Against.
“Journalism is just a gun. It’s only got one bullet in it, but if you aim right, that’s all you need. Aim it right, and you can blow a kneecap off the world.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kenny
Member Avatar
WASC Suicide Bomber
For.

The original resolution is repulsive, and actually goes against women's rights. Too bad the simple-minded "Yay women!" majority in the WA will never see past the fact that it legalizes abortions, and must therefore be good for women.
About us
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Guy
Member Avatar
Old Admin Slave
Kenny, there are IRL jurisdictions on which the law is entirely silent on the matter of abortion, allowing the procedure to be regulated by the appropriate medical bodies. How is this inappropriate?

I agree that the original resolution is unfortunately not as clear as it should be, but conversely, I do not believe that On Abortion is sufficient. Without an adequate replacement, my position is against the repeal.

Quoting the relevant clauses of the resolution:
Quote:
 
RECOGNISES that the termination of pregnancy is a medical procedure, with all the rights and protections afforded to such a practice,

MANDATES that Member Nations recognise the right of all individuals to have their pregnancies terminated through safe, openly accessible procedures,

DEMANDS that Member Nations prohibit any impediment to the termination of pregnancy that is not applied to medical procedures of similar risk and complexity,
How much room there is for a legislature to regulate the medical practice of abortion, and follow all three clauses, is ambiguous.

For example, regulating sex-selective abortion, you could argue that may comply with all three, or fail all three.
Edited by Guy, Nov 24 2015, 04:07 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
98X
Member Avatar
Poster
Yeah, I did a double-take while reading it myself for the second time, especially the "more moderate and refined approach" clause. This leaves the door wide-open to full-blown misogyny under the disguise of "debate."

Also, there's a saying in my RL country that'd be relevant here, "Pro-life until they're born."

All this comes from someone who usually votes for repeals, and against the replacement.

98X voes against.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kenny
Member Avatar
WASC Suicide Bomber
Quote:
 
How much room there is for a legislature to regulate the medical practice of abortion, and follow all three clauses, is ambiguous.

Not really. The language is intended for the Patient's Rights Act's provisions to kick in when it invokes the phrase "medical procedure." Under PRA, patients can undergo any medical procedure they desire, so long as it is legal under national law. RF makes all abortions legal under national law; therefore, a patient wants a partial-birth abortion, she gets a partial-birth abortion.

Guy
Nov 24 2015, 04:07 PM
Without an adequate replacement, my position is against the repeal.

As the author has repeatedly pointed out, there is a replacement written. It has been linked to multiple times in the debate thread, and is authored by SchutteGod, who co-authored Charter of Civil Rights. And it's nowhere near the carnival of misogyny that 98X obscenely fantasizes of. Look, the opposition has proven they can successfully demagogue this issue whenever it comes up for review, and I got to hand it to them: they are exceptionally good at painting any opponent of RF as people who beat up women for sport. But it doesn't make them right. I've known Scion for years; he is an exceptional and trustworthy player. Besides which, he is a liberal in RL and probably would not want to repeal something only to result in anti-choice mandates being imposed on all nations.
Edited by Kenny, Nov 24 2015, 06:36 PM.
About us
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Guy
Member Avatar
Old Admin Slave
I would appreciate it if you avoided referring to another member's statements as obscene, if you could ;)

I appreciate that there is an intention to replace RF with another resolution. However, without one already in the queue, I believe like most intended repeal-and-replace, the latter part will be forgotten.

Quote:
 
RF makes all abortions legal under national law
Well, that's where you could have varying interpretations.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kenny
Member Avatar
WASC Suicide Bomber
Guy
Nov 24 2015, 08:40 PM
I would appreciate it if you avoided referring to another member's statements as obscene, if you could ;)
Sorry about that.

Quote:
 
I appreciate that there is an intention to replace RF with another resolution. However, without one already in the queue, I believe like most intended repeal-and-replace, the latter part will be forgotten.

It would be illegal to place one in the queue before the resolution is repealed anyway. The repeal author did not make it clear from the start, and perhaps he should have, but since the replacement was never earmarked for this specific repeal, maybe he felt doing so would have been presumptuous? To his credit, he did endorse the replacement, so it is rather dishonorable to attack him as an anti-choice bigot (as some on the NS forums have done) just because he has honest objections to a however-well-intentioned law.

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
RF makes all abortions legal under national law
Well, that's where you could have varying interpretations.

Not really -- when a resolution declares an absolute right and makes no allowances for exceptions, it is legally difficult to get around.
About us
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Guy
Member Avatar
Old Admin Slave
I'm not sure it declares an absolute right anywhere.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kenny
Member Avatar
WASC Suicide Bomber
Quote:
 
RECOGNISES that the termination of pregnancy is a medical procedure, with all the rights and protections afforded to such a practice,

MANDATES that Member Nations recognise the right of all individuals to have their pregnancies terminated through safe, openly accessible procedures,

I call it an "absolute" right because there are no listed exceptions or allowances for the state to regulate. It legalizes any and all "safe, openly accessible procedures" to terminate a pregnancy, and that's all there is to it -- unless politicians want to be disingenuous about the meaning of "safe," there's really no way out of it.
About us
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Assembly · Next Topic »
Add Reply