NationStates Jolt Archive

Please read, debate, and consider my new proposal about a compromise on abortion. I think that it is something that can be agreed upon by both pro-life and pro-choice people. It gives the mother time to decide, and it provides that when the baby has distinctly human characteristics, abortion is illegal. I could explain this further, but please read my proposal on page 13 of the proposals to see what I have to say.

the problem is that while in real life you would see compromise over this issue in exchange for votes on another proposal the nationstates environment is not conducive to this.

So while some pro-life advocates may come forward to support this as a good start many of the pro-choice will treat this with suspicion since they are forced to concede territory.

In short, compromises don't quite work like they do in real life

I would argue only to say that both sides are conceding because both sides are giving up something.

I am a staunch pro-life advocate and I hate to give any ground short of banning abortion completely, but I realize that something needs to be done to appease both sides. I think this does that. It provides solutions to both the rape and mother's health issues. It gives time for a mother to decide about abortion. And it says that once the baby is distinctly human, abortion is not an option anymore. I think it satisfies both sides.

The Great Nation of Putergeeks does not support this proposal.

Abortion is awesome!
I think that anyone who reads this thread should have been aborted.
Abortion now! Prevent retardedness from spreading!

Abortion is awesome!
I think that anyone who reads this thread should have been aborted.
Abortion now! Prevent retardedness from spreading!

I only wish you were aborted so I would not be forced to read your inane comment.

I was hoping this compromise would be viewed as something worthwhile, but obviously everyone is taking it as a joke. I ask all delegates to approve this proposal even if you don't agree with it. Something like this needs to be voten on by the entire United Nations.

Abortion is awesome!
I think that anyone who reads this thread should have been aborted.
Abortion now! Prevent retardedness from spreading!

This comment is strangely fitting, since Planned Parenthood was begun by supporters of eugenics ("kill the retards").

the problem is that while in real life you would see compromise over this issue in exchange for votes on another proposal the nationstates environment is not conducive to this.

So while some pro-life advocates may come forward to support this as a good start many of the pro-choice will treat this with suspicion since they are forced to concede territory.

In short, compromises don't quite work like they do in real life

As one of the pro-choice advocates, I'm afraid I must agree with Ziliarn on this. Given Gurthark's liberal immigration policy, we'd rather see abortion outlawed outright in a few countries (as long as those countries have open borders) than have to place steep restrictions upon it ourselves. We'd rather abortion laws be liberalized everywhere, but this is not really something about which we're willing to compromise.

Also note: Simply because a position falls in between two other positions, it is not necessarily superior to both of them. We do not feel we are being unreasonable rejecting a compromise on an issue on which we feel we are simply in the right.

Sincerely,
Miranda Googleplex
United Nations Ambassador
Community of Gurthark

The only response I have to that is that this proposal is clearly leaned toward the pro-choice side of the argument. It accounts for every argument that pro-choice people have given to me outside of allowing abortion at any point during the pregnancy. By the way...will someone pro-choice please explain to me how a baby one day from being born is completely different that a baby just born? Because that is what many pro-choice people advocate the senseless killing of a baby one day from being born by advocating abortion at any time during the pregnancy.

i'll get my delegate to support this to see what happens when it reaches quorum. I only wish the dynamics in this group were more prone to trading of support on various issues.

Please read, debate, and consider my new proposal about a compromise on abortion. I think that it is something that can be agreed upon by both pro-life and pro-choice people. It gives the mother time to decide, and it provides that when the baby has distinctly human characteristics, abortion is illegal. I could explain this further, but please read my proposal on page 13 of the proposals to see what I have to say.

"THE TIME FOR COMPROMISE HAS PASSED! NOW ALL SHALL SMELL SOUTHERN POWDER AND FEEL SOUTHERN STEEL!"
--Jeffy Davis, 1861

Anyways, the mother has the right to remove the baby from her womb whenever she pleases. It's her body.

It may not be okay to kill the baby right before it's born, but the mother can still extract it. It's called a Caesarian Section. The difference is that I support the right of the mother to get such a procedure done at any time in her pregnancy. Except when it's clear that the baby couldn't possibly survive outside the mother (this is true for before six months) prudence dictates that it's okay to kill it first.

Wow...there is absolutely no response for something like that. If you can honestly justify a Casearean section being anything like an abortion, you are better than any doctor I've ever seen. They cannot be compared. C-Sections are done to bring the baby out alive so there will be no risk to mother or child.

Simply because a position falls in between two other positions, it is not necessarily superior to both of them. We do not feel we are being unreasonable rejecting a compromise on an issue on which we feel we are simply in the right.
Thank you, Gurthark.

Wow...there is absolutely no response for something like that. If you can honestly justify a Casearean section being anything like an abortion, you are better than any doctor I've ever seen. They cannot be compared. C-Sections are done to bring the baby out alive so there will be no risk to mother or child.

It's the same principle... the mother, as the sole owner of her body, has the absolute right to remove anything from her body whenever she wants.