At Vote:Repeal "Reproductive Freedoms" [Complete] [Complete]

Abacathea

Abacathea

TNPer
Repeal "Reproductive Freedoms"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.


Category: Repeal

Resolution: GA#286

Proposed by: Alchemic Queendom​

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #286: Reproductive Freedoms (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The World Assembly,

Noting that World Assembly Resolution #286, “Reproductive Freedoms”, creates a totally unrestricted right to obtain an abortion at any stage of a pregnancy,

Realizing that this includes a right to obtain very late term abortions, or abortions after a genetic test, for example for the presence of Down's syndrome,

Furthermore, reiterating its commitment to human equality,

Believing that one of the most important aspects of human equality is the abolition of gender-based discrimination,

Applauding previous World Assembly legislation attempting to address gender-based discrimination, while recognising that this is an unfinished project,

Acknowledging that in many cultures economic and social norms have led to prejudices against female children and to discrimination in favour of male children,

Understanding that a common means of expressing this prejudice is through sex-selective abortion, wherein an abortion is conducted only after a sex test of the foetus has confirmed it to be female,

Also aware of informal folk attitudes that may lead to a pregnancy being ascribed female characteristics even in the absence of definitive medical testing, leading to sex-selective abortion,

Arguing that sex-selective abortion has serious societal consequences, including fuelling further discriminatory attitudes and practices, and contributing to socioeconomic inequality,

Considering there to be a compelling interest in preventing sex-selective abortion,

Disgusted that Resolution #286 prohibits legislation to prevent sex-selective abortion,

Repulsed that this Resolution amounts to a World Assembly mandate for gendercide and does active harm by preventing efforts to address gender imbalances,

Emphasising that this repeal in no way represents an argument against the basic right to obtain an abortion,

Nonetheless, holding the issue of sex-selective abortion sufficiently important to merit reconsideration of the Resolution in question:

World Assembly Resolution #286 is struck out and rendered null and void.
 
MINISTERS REVIEW​
​

And so the abortion debate rages on. This Minister waits for the day this is no longer the case. Nevertheless, here we go once again. Lets have a look at the proposal at vote; REPEAL "REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOMS"

In truth, this proposal isn't really saying a lot that others haven't said before it, minus one new, and slightly more creative argument which we shall examine later.

The first argument we see brought up is the old one of allowances of late term abortions
  • Noting that World Assembly Resolution #286, “Reproductive Freedoms”, creates a totally unrestricted right to obtain an abortion at any stage of a pregnancy,

Now the issue presented here has been brought up a few times in the past, and has always been dismissed the same way, just because it allows it, doesn't mean it's commonplace. Reproductive freedoms is meant to afford protections. Anyone who is going in to a state of late term abortion is likely doing it for a serious medical reason. General common sense has to prevail here. The law cannot account for every possible scenario, and having spoken to the authors of the original resolution there was some sound reasoning behind the crafting of this act.

This, however, as an extension to the first is a new argument I haven't seen before;
  • Realizing that this includes a right to obtain very late term abortions, or abortions after a genetic test, for example for the presence of Down's syndrome,

However, it is completely irrelevant. Is the proposal author here attempting to state that this law allows people to abort once they've discovered there's a genetic defect? That this would be a primary reason for abortion in the above context? If so it seems a very poor taste argument to be making and not one strong enough to defend the argument being made prior.

Now, this is the "new" argument I alluded to prior, and one on which the latter half of the proposal focuses on
  • Arguing that sex-selective abortion has serious societal consequences, including fuelling further discriminatory attitudes and practices, and contributing to socioeconomic inequality,

The resolution author suggests that abortions may be gender specific. This is most certainly a new, and creative spin on the proposal but is a bit of a far stretch at the same time. Sex selective abortions are at best, extremely rare. And when one considers the intent and nature of "Reproductive Freedoms" which was to afford protections not luxuries to a female, coupled with the expected good faith that comes with a resolution in the World Assembly, this seems a stretch.

This is not to say that this doesn't hold merit, it's likely somewhere this is probably happening, but to equate it to a grievous problem in the resolution in such a manner as above would almost suggest that nations as a whole are selectively aborting based on gender, and this Minister just finds that hard to believe.

MINISTERS SUGGESTION​
​

In truth, the proposal's not bad, it's written by what (I believe) is a new author to the assembly, and on that consideration, kudos for a fine job. Nevertheless, the abortion debacle that "On Abortion" brought and now its next of kin "Reproductive Freedoms" has become old and tiresome. I must applaud the proposal author for their creative new take and new arguments on the text which have not been raised before, but ultimately feel this still does not justify the removal of such legislation.

As a result, the minister suggests: AGAINST.

AS PER USUAL THIS IS A SUGGESTED VOTE ONLY, PLEASE VOTE FOR, AGAINST OR ABSTAIN AS DESIRED BELOW.
 
A telegram I received on this matter:

Honoured Delegate,

There is currently at vote in the World Assembly a resolution to repeal GAR#286, "Reproductive Freedoms". As the sponsor of GAR#286, we feel it only necessary to raise our voice in protest of this atrocious attack on the freedoms we worked so hard to give your citizens. The arguments contained in the repeal are not an attack against our law, but on your very inhabitants - the whole thing is a vile accusation that your citizens are simply murdering their female children, probably late in pregnancy.

Yes, our resolution does allow late-term termination of pregnancy, and there are many reasons for this. It is, and always has been, our contention that terminating a late-term pregnancy, through abortion or other means, is an exceedingly rare practice, and generally only occurs when there is a strong medical need. As such, we felt it prudent to remove as many barriers as possible to such medical procedures, so that people can recover and go on with their lives as soon as possible.

Strictly speaking, Reproductive Freedoms does not prohibit termination of pregnancy to avoid bearing offspring of a particular gender. However, we feel that if this is indeed occurring, that a more proper solution would be to find out the root cause of such practices and eliminating the core problem. As we mentioned in our original effort to see GAR#286 become law, if individuals are forbidden from terminating their own pregnancies - through abortion or other means legally available to them - the truly desperate will always find a way to get the job done of their own volition. This would not only bring about a needlessly grisly end to the life of the unborn child, but may also cause extreme harm or death to the individual that was forced to resort to an illicit procedure because they felt they had no other choice.

Reproductive Freedoms seeks to give individuals the choice to maintain their own bodily sovereignty, and if they do choose not to bear children, to give them the right to make that decision and carry it out in a safe, effective, legal manner. We have faith that this freedom to choose will not simply be abused - it is not a decision that many would take lightly, at any stage of their pregnancy. We have faith that your citizens will make the right choice, and not simply choose to commit gendercide. We have faith that your citizens are inherently good people.

The The Borderlands of Alchemic Queendom, it seems, does not share our good faith. They accuse your citizens of being bloodthirsty misogynists, who would probably slaughter grown women if they were not suitable for breeding. Their accusations are disgusting, and it is our sincere hope that you pay them no heed as you cast your vote AGAINST the repeal at vote.

Forever Blessed Be,

Milþiköpa, Minister for Diplomacy
Epi?kœ, Emissary of Eireann Fae
Penned by the hand of Rowan
Click to expand...
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top