NationStates Jolt Archive

The Confederacy of South Puyallup, UN Delegate from the region of USMB Warfare, proposes the following resolution. Comments from other nations are welcome.

-------------------------------
WHEREAS the United Nations passed the resolution entitled "Abortion Rights" on 5 Jun 2004, and

WHEREAS less than 28 percent of United Nation member States voted in favor of the resolution, and

WHEREAS the wording of the Abortion Rights resolution is open to such interpretation that abortion-on-demand is mandated throughout a woman's pregnancy, and

WHEREAS the United Nations has hundreds, if not thousands of member States whose populations believe abortion to be a form of murder, and

WHEREAS the Abortion Rights resolution unfairly mandates the legalization of abortion in member States where the majority of the population opposes such legalization,

THEREFORE, the United Nations resolves the following:

1. The United Nations resolution entitled "Abortion Rights," implemented Saturday, June 5, 2004, is hereby repealed.

2. The United Nations hereby relinquishes its right to legislate on the matter of abortion.

3. All United Nations member States are free to determine their own laws regarding abortion, the right to life, and the freedom of contraceptive choice, as a majority of their citizens shall determine in a manner consistent with the State's legislative process.

4. No United Nations member State shall act in such a way to forcibly effect change in the abortion laws of another United Nations member State.

You are aware that repeals aren't allowed as a matter of game mechanics, right? I agree that the resolution in question was terribly worded, but the mods have been completely resolute on this. This is why people need to, y'know, actually think when writing or voting for proposals.

also: please don't turn this into a big rant on WHY CAN'T WE HAVE REPEALS YOU COMMIE-NAZI SCUM. You won't be saying anything that hasn't been said already.

I do remember one of the mods talking about putting repeals in, though. It happened a while ago, can't remember which mod.

Yes, Enn, I emailed Admin about those whisperings a while back, and [violet] replied that, yes, she was looking into such coding, but did not expect it to be done soon. So it looks like we will be waiting a while before it will happen.

Until then, this proposal is illegal in its current wording and effect.

Thank you for the help... I read about the rule against repeals after I posted this.

Any suggestions to effect the same changes within the rules of the UN?

You're not allowed to deny the letter of the resolution in question, since this is judged to constitute a repeal. However, you are allowed to exploit the wording.

Description: Henceforth all women shall have the right to choose whether to have an abortion or not, no member nation will interfere with a woman's right to have an abortion.

So you really can't effect precisely the same changes, since your resolution (which I'd probably have supported in other circumstances) gives nations full autonomy over the issue.

Here's what you can do:

Write a resolution that explicitly limits when an abortion can be carried out. 'The right to choose whether to have an abortion or not' is preserved; it just has to be carried out before the third trimester. Affirm said right within the resolution, to avoid it getting deleted.
Write a resolution that affirms that affirms that a nation is allowed to ban abortion within its own borders if it allows and facilitates women to travel to nearby nations that do allow it. (If you made it so expensive that poorer women couldn't reasonably choose that option, that probably counts as interfering with rights. As a comparison, if there weren't any legal-aid lawyers nobody would believe ne had a genuine right to fair trial).

You're not allowed to deny the letter of the resolution in question, since this is judged to constitute a repeal. However, you are allowed to exploit the wording.
True, Rehochipe, but you need to be very careful, and the resolution in question is so vague its very easy to argue into dead-lock.

Write a resolution that explicitly limits when an abortion can be carried out. The right to choose whether to have an abortion or not' is preserved; it just has to be carried out before the third trimester. Affirm said right within the resolution, to avoid it getting deleted.
I don't agree, because your having the government, through the U.N. interfere with her right to do so, by limiting it. That is still interference, I'm afraid.

Write a resolution that affirms that affirms that a nation is allowed to ban abortion within its own borders if it allows and facilitates women to travel to nearby nations that do allow it. (If you made it so expensive that poorer women couldn't reasonably choose that option, that probably counts as interfering with rights. As a comparison, if there weren't any legal-aid lawyers nobody would believe ne had a genuine right to fair trial).But I would think, this still makes the government interfere. Because your not letting them do it in your borders, even though U.N. law which you must abide by says you must allow it as its a woman right, etc, etc, etc ...

I will take these suggestions into consideration. Thanks very much for your help Rehochipe and Komokom.