Not that I like this issue, being a sensitive topic. But I was trying to find a reason to vote
for this resolution. Here are my considerations:
REALIZING that the current bill's effect is close to nothing to reduce unnecessary abortions.
YEARNING to reduce the prevalence of abortions in circumstances where the practice thereof is unneeded.
First of all, is the author referencing to the circumstances that lead to "unnecessary abortions"? I would like to see an(a list of) example(s).
Why criticize the current legislation by indicating that its effects are close to nothing in terms of reducing "unnecessary abortions"? Is this resolution
really getting somewhere? I don't think so, let's see.
RECOGNIZING that there are other alternatives, such as birth control, to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
Birth control? Ok, that
may cover a part of the problem (although sexual and reproductive education is a proper way to go, but this is another topic)... What about those women who wish/have to abort due to extraordinary circumstances, such as rape (not that I'm going to stop at this point), an exceptional risk to their health and/or the health of the creature in their womb?
ACKNOWLEDGING that many nations, particularly those who hold serious moral reservations about the practice of abortion, may seek other ways to deal with unwanted pregnancies while conforming to their moral compass,
True, there are nations with reservations about the practice of abortion. If those nations can look for other ways to deal with this situation, why not give an example/suggestion about those ways?
Let's note that GAR#286 acknowledges that individuals "may have cultural or religious misgivings regarding termination of pregnancy" and mandates member nations to "recognise the right of all individuals to have their pregnancies terminated through safe, openly accessible procedures". This doesn't mean that every nation is enforcing GAR#286. On the contrary, in nations with moral reservations over abortion, it could still be delicate to even mention the subject. That's something that we need to check out.
REALIZING that there are more moral alternatives to the current bill that can be worked out to satisfy both the parent and protect the child which is being born.
SEEING that a woman controls her body.
However, SEEING that it is immoral and wrong that another individual makes the choice over another's existence.
Yet, ACKNOWLEDGING that these options are questionable in certain life-threatening or dangerous situations.
At this point we may think that we are reading a debate, not a resolution: "a woman controls her body" (or "a woman has the right to decide about her body"?), right after that, we find that is "immoral and wrong" to make a choice over another's existence (what happened to the circumstances where abortion is unnecessary? At this point, we need them -or some of them- to be listed)... Then, the resolution seems to go back, by acknowledging that there are certain situations in which abortion might be the right procedure.
BELIEVING that these rights will be worked out by the World Assembly to remain.
(...)
BELIEVING that we, the World Assembly, will work on a more moral, benefiting and sustainable replacement for Resolution #286.
That's what we really want to see. A benefiting and sustainable (not sure about the "more moral" thing) replacement for a resolution that improves civil rights.
Result:
1. The subject discussed here is extremely sensitive, and this repeal attempt does not address it in the most appropriate way.
2. Even with the implementation of GAR#286, nations with moral reservations about abortion may not be respecting what was agreed upon. Repealing the resolution would further undermine the rights referred to, and would give those nations more reason to believe that their "judgment" prevailed.
3. It is wrong to implement legislation that push us backwards in matters of civil rights. The principle of progressivity must prevail. If we really want to move forward and improve the statements of GAR#286, the issue should be openly discussed. That's the only way to prevent future attempts to repeal GAR#286 without a basis (and most worrying: without a valid replacement).
I'm absolutely voting
AGAINST this resolution.
PS: Sorry for any mistake/typo in my analysis. It's almost 5 am here and I had to write this before going to bed, lol.
