NationStates Jolt Archive

ABORTION

WHEREAS, no woman may be sentenced to death because she has had an abortion.

WHEREAS, no woman may be imprisoned for life because she has had an abortion.

WHEREAS, no woman will receive discrimination because she has had an abortion.

This law will not legalize abortion, but it will protect the rights of those who have had "illegal" abortions.

The Confederacy of Caligatio fails to see the relevance of such a proposal.

Criminals, under the law, posess certain rights. If a woman were to have an "illegal" abortion, she would then be a criminal, and would have access to said rights.

Thus, this resolution has serves no real purpose except to stir up controversy over the abortion issue.

Todd M., President of the Confederacy of Caligatio

This proposal is completely devoid of content.
Notice that it forbids a woman from being imprisoned for life for an abortion, but not from being imprisoned.

The entire Internationale would wholeheartedly throw their support behind a un mandate that protected a woman's fundamental right to choose, this proposal has no content, and in fact, is subversive by indirectly sanctioning imprisonment and punishment.

Have fun passing this bill.

It won't fly, so give up now.

This proposal is completely devoid of content.
Notice that it forbids a woman from being imprisoned for life for an abortion, but not from being imprisoned.

The entire Internationale would wholeheartedly throw their support behind a un mandate that protected a woman's fundamental right to choose, this proposal has no content, and in fact, is subversive by indirectly sanctioning imprisonment and punishment.

The Holy Republic of Dalichae would most certainly NOT support any mandate that would give women the right to murder unborn children. This issue is not even a consideration in my nation. Please do not throw such ignorant assumptions.

-Dalichae, President, Holy Republic of Dalichae.

I agree with my esteemed colleague, Strefethen, from the mighty Internationale!

Abortions for everyone!!

To the most "esteemed" delegate from Dalichae,

I, personally, do not see any "ignorant assumption" in my statement, nor do any of my colleagues.
We simply stated that the internationale would be behind a stronger version fo the proposal but find the current version worthless and subversive.
This is true.
I have asked every member of the internationale.

So my question is, what exactly have I been ignorant of?

Perhaps, before the pro-religion nutjob of a delegate from the Dalichae opens his mouth, he should learn the theories of language and syntax so that he can follow a simple statement.

Please,
have a great day.

Sincerely,
The delegate from Strefethen

I sincerely apologize for my last post.
Allow me to correct myself...

"before he, she, or ze opens he/she/ze's mouth"


thank you,
have a great day

WHEREAS, no woman will receive discrimination because she has had an abortion.
You can provide penalties for discrimination, ban discrimination in hiring practices, oppose discriminatory remarks in the press, etc ... but you cannot prevent discrimination.

Apart from that, the rest of the bill could conceiveably be enforceable, though I think that very very few delegates would be willing to stand behind such a limited and pointless proposal. While we don't agree that it is completely devoid of content, it has no real value in defending 'the rights of those who have had "illegal" abortions.'

Please put this in for a rewrite, or even better, into the rubbish disposal.

Much like our esteemed colleagues from Strefethen, Caligato and others we will not support this resolution.

While we believe it is every womans right to choose and would gladly lend our support to a proposal to that effect we do not feel that a resolution barring some, but not all, punishment for abortion is justified.

We also do not believe in trying to sneak issues in the back door - they should be dealt with head on.

Much like our esteemed colleagues from Strefethen, Caligato and others we will not support this resolution.

While we believe it is every womans right to choose and would gladly lend our support to a proposal to that effect we do not feel that a resolution barring some, but not all, punishment for abortion is justified.

We also do not believe in trying to sneak issues in the back door - they should be dealt with head on.

I think abortion should be left to individual nations to decide, we have many different views on this standpoint, whilst my nation supports the woman's right to choose it also understands that there is an equally valid arguement against abortion. When there are two such arguements, with no obvious winner (which is more important the rights of the mother or the unborn child?). To introduce a resolution would futher undermine the already fragile state of international affairs within the UN - which was designed as a forum for international cooperation not as a battle ground for ethical and moral debates.

Although arguments can be made against abortion we disagree with those arguments.

We consider this a matter of individual rights.

Much like the euthanasia bill we feel it is our duty to fight for the rights of those who cannot do so themselves because they live in a state that surpresses their freedom - whether this be through dictatorship of an individual, of an elite or of the masses (democracy).

We do not wish to force anyone to do anything (contrary to the argumentation brought forward by those who oppose us) but rather we wish to decentralize the decision as much as possible.

The UN cannot determine whether you have an abortion
BUT neither should your nation be allowed to determine it
The choice should be YOURS.

Freedom of choice for the individual is the main concern of our nation - not the sovereignty of nations.

ABORTION

WHEREAS, no woman may be sentenced to death because she has had an abortion.

WHEREAS, no woman may be imprisoned for life because she has had an abortion.

WHEREAS, no woman will receive discrimination because she has had an abortion.

This law will not legalize abortion, but it will protect the rights of those who have had "illegal" abortions.

Change line three to "no woman will recieve discrimination from the government because she had an abortion."

If she works for a prolife group, you're damn right she'll experience discrimination there. And they're within their rights.

Why must we continually rehash such issues as this?
It should be clear by now that there will be no resolution to such deeply controversial problems, at least in NS.

Shall we please just drop it?

I think that only if a female is raped and winds up pregnet then they should be a loud to get an abrotion. :)

Why must we continually rehash such issues as this?
It should be clear by now that there will be no resolution to such deeply controversial problems, at least in NS.

Shall we please just drop it?

I think it should, rather than be a proposal at the UN, it should be a daily issue that way every country can vote as they want and they will be happy knowing they got what they want instead of having to fight becvause NS is divided into twp camps over this.

Hey thanks for the suggestions... I suppose it is sorta devoid of content... but I know that there are a lot of lunatic fringe groups out there who would never let a complete abortion legalizatio bill pass. Oh well.

We call them lunatic fringe, they call us lunatic fringe.

it's a fight the internationale would like to take up.


look for a fully fledged proposal soon.


oooh. it'll be fun. i love catholics, i love them good.

We call them lunatic fringe, they call us lunatic fringe.

it's a fight the internationale would like to take up.


look for a fully fledged proposal soon.


oooh. it'll be fun. i love catholics, i love them good.

What exactly does catholicism have to do with this?

well nothing.

except that catholicism as a religion is cooly against abortion, and as someone who was dubbed by a cardinal as either the next doctor of the church or the antichrist at the age of 14 when i pressed him on the issue of abortion and gay rights in the church, i find debating with catholics fun.
(that story is true)

religious arguments against abortion, in general, amuse me. and they are fun, i picked out the catholics cuz i was at a time long ago, one of their ranks.
people who are against abortion for other reasons are just sort of sad. debating them is less fun and more just sort of agonizingly, mind wrenchingly frustrating.

well nothing.

except that catholicism as a religion is cooly against abortion, and as someone who was dubbed by a cardinal as either the next doctor of the church or the antichrist at the age of 14 when i pressed him on the issue of abortion and gay rights in the church, i find debating with catholics fun.
(that story is true)

religious arguments against abortion, in general, amuse me. and they are fun, i picked out the catholics cuz i was at a time long ago, one of their ranks.
people who are against abortion for other reasons are just sort of sad. debating them is less fun and more just sort of agonizingly, mind wrenchingly frustrating.

people who are against abortion for other reasons are just sort of sad. debating them is less fun and more just sort of agonizingly, mind wrenchingly frustrating.

I'll say this now, I am neither pro-choice or pro-life - like the majority of the population in the west I am somewhere between. I agree that women should be allowed to have an abortion - in certain circumstances such as rape, medical emergency, teenage pregnancy, etc. What I do not wish to see is women disposing of their unborn children because they don't want to have a baby at that particular time. A child should not be killed because of a burgeoning career, we need to respect human life a bit more than capitalist aspirations. Abortion is a horrible thing (just ask any woman who has gone through it) and we should not be condoning it as a method of contraception (plus this leads to the belief that you can have as many abortions as you want when the reality is it is oftern only medically sound to have one abortion in your lifetime).

This proposal is completely devoid of content.
Notice that it forbids a woman from being imprisoned for life for an abortion, but not from being imprisoned.

The entire Internationale would wholeheartedly throw their support behind a un mandate that protected a woman's fundamental right to choose, this proposal has no content, and in fact, is subversive by indirectly sanctioning imprisonment and punishment.

Red Empiric provences do not allow the right to choose, any more than the right to commit any other form of murder, and we most certainly would not 'wholeheartedly' throw our support behind such an abbohrent docterine. ONCE AGAIN we ask UN members to keep their own laws and customs in their own borders, and stop trying to force it on other nations. :x

This proposal is completely devoid of content.
Notice that it forbids a woman from being imprisoned for life for an abortion, but not from being imprisoned.

The entire Internationale would wholeheartedly throw their support behind a un mandate that protected a woman's fundamental right to choose, this proposal has no content, and in fact, is subversive by indirectly sanctioning imprisonment and punishment.

Red Empiric provences do not allow the right to choose, any more than the right to commit any other form of murder, and we most certainly would not 'wholeheartedly' throw our support behind such an abbohrent docterine. ONCE AGAIN we ask UN members to keep their own laws and customs in their own borders, and stop trying to force it on other nations. :x

The Spokesperson for strefethen: the only case where i would in fact have supported abortion.

I am so sick of this topic.
It's the perfect flamebait, guaranteed to start an uproar. No other topic comes close to its incendiary quality.
It appeals to pyromaniac trolls.

To be fair, this topic does appear incindiery... but, in my opinion, that is kind of sad.

Hey, I have an idea, and I'll lay it out for you folks and you can tell me what you think.

You are right, we can't force people to allow abortions if they don't want to, but I think that we can all say that we support true equality for women.

So how about this:
A UN mandate that requires equal effect on a man's life as a woman's from pregnancy.
Obviously, that would need to be fleshed out. But something along the lines of Insofar as a woman is required to miss days at work over the 9 month span, a man must also. Etc. Etc.


anyone see anything wrong with that, and I mean the concept of it, arguments over the ability to put it into acceptable UN speak (and ability to structure it so it is enforceable) will come later.

I did NOT start this topic as flamebait... stop trying to read minds.

abortions should be legalized and will be in my nation.

if any woman decides to have an "illehal" abortion and is found acting upon it, she will recieve punishments for her behavior, but not too severe.

the act of abortion shouldnt be banned though, because mistakes happen and not everyone is perfect. not only mistakes, but other reasonings as to having an abortions exsist also.

whatever the reason, abortion is allowed for anyone and everyone, no age limit either, as long as it is legal and done in the proper manner.

In my nation the woman will be allowed to do what she thinks is right for her, but only if the pheotus was brought about by a rape.
Other than that she will have to keep it as it would have been concieved willingly.Which means she wanted it in the first place.
But then the male partner in this procedure will be bought to book for his part as well. He will be found using the Genetic finger print profile of this Nation and made to bear his part of the hardship now inflicted on the woman and the state.
The whole thing could be avoided if the couple involved thought about the outcome of their passions.

I did NOT start this topic as flamebait... stop trying to read minds.

I did not mean to imply anything about your intentions.
The effect of this topic is to invite a flamefest, intentions notwithstanding.
We should simply not discuss abortion, period.