[GA - Failed] Repeal: "Reproductive Freedoms"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Morover

Morover

Primarily a Lurker
TNP Nation
Morover

ga.jpg

Repeal: "Reproductive Freedoms"
Category: Repeal | GA #286
Proposed by: Marxist Germany | Onsite Topic​
The World Assembly,

Applauding the efforts of the resolution GA#286 to protect the right to access abortion;

Noting that this resolution allows abortion on demand, disregarding the potential for sex-selective abortion, a practice that harms the gender balance and creates societal problems such as; low marriage rates and low birth rates; and other discriminatory reasons for abortion such as disability and skin colour, reasons that this assembly is attempting to eradicate;

Observing that the target resolution mandates the legalisation of abortion on demand up until birth, a stance which is radical and needlessly divisive,

Understanding that numerous member states have legitimate ethical concerns regarding the unconditional legality of abortions after fetal viability, especially when alternatives such as adoption are readily available;

Frustrated that the term "termination of pregnancy" forces member nations to legalize Dilation and Extraction procedures, for example, commonly known as partial-birth abortions, procedures in which a living and viable feotus is destroyed despite it being able to experience pain in late term pregnancy;

Disgusted because GA#286 "recognises that the termination of pregnancy is a medical procedure," it permits member nations to require parental consent for any abortion procedure performed on a minor or a mentally disabled person, as per the mandates of GA#29, thus hampering the ability of the minor or mentally disabled adult to access abortion, in case their parent or guardian refuses to allow them to undergo an abortion;

Cognisant that because "termination of pregnancy" is a medical procedure, it is therefore protected by resolutions such as GA#29 in emergency cases, as GA#29 states "Patients have the right to emergency medical treatment under circumstances requiring lifesaving procedures", which means that termination of pregnancy must be legalised in life threatening cases;

Acknowledging the resolution GA#128, which allows abortion in cases of extreme disability, rape or incest, and in life threatening conditions;

Aware that the radical approach of the target resolution has only caused division within this assembly, including 5 defeated repeal attempts and dozens of attempted repeal proposals by numerous ambassadors from different nations, and has led to many nations choosing to leave the assembly, thus reducing its power;

Concerned with the many flaws present in the resolution, which should be replaced by a better version that handles the issue in a manner that guarantees the right to abortion whilst placing reasonable restrictions that prevent abuse such as the example mentioned above;

Hereby,

Repeals General Assembly Resolution number 286, titled "Reproductive Freedoms".
Click to expand...
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.

Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!
 
For.

While my nation supports abortion rights and supports policies that prevent sex-selective discrimination, this is not necessarily the case in all nations, some of whom may be intentionally misinterpreting the original resolution in order to target vulnerable populations under their control. For this reason, I believe that this resolution, however misleading its wording, does note real potential issues in the application of GA #286. I also believe that the upcoming proposal "Access to Abortion" will be a much better resolution and solves the issues raised here.
 
Last edited:
For, because the only things I want to add is making it better and clearer, otherwise I will let it pass through if I was in charge.
 
Against. I think certain issues raised by the author as arguments for repeal could be addressed in a separate proposal and there is no need to repeal this resolution to do so.
 
Fregerson:
Against. I think certain issues raised by the author as arguments for repeal could be addressed in a separate proposal and there is no need to repeal this resolution to do so.
Click to expand...
Would that not be the purpose of a Repeal and Replace? To repeal a flawed piece of legislation and replace it? Furthermore, defining "termination of pregnancy" as a medical procedure cannot be changed without contradicting this resolution, thus, minors and legally incompetent persons can still be denied access to abortion by their guardians.

I would also like to note that GA#128 On Abortion mandates the legalisation of abortion for the firs trimester on demand, and afterwards for cases of rape, incest, and medical complicates and disabilities.
 
(Marxist) Germany:
Would that not be the purpose of a Repeal and Replace? To repeal a flawed piece of legislation and replace it? Furthermore, defining "termination of pregnancy" as a medical procedure cannot be changed without contradicting this resolution, thus, minors and legally incompetent persons can still be denied access to abortion by their guardians.

I would also like to note that GA#128 On Abortion mandates the legalisation of abortion for the firs trimester on demand, and afterwards for cases of rape, incest, and medical complicates and disabilities.
Click to expand...
Honestly I don't find a problem with such a definition at all, and I feel that it may be unnecessary to narrow the definition even further. Maybe in your opinion this is an unacceptably liberal definition, which is why you made such a repeal. In my opinion, when we utilise these "partial abortion" methods should be left to the discretion to the state, and I do not want to limit myself to restrict such cases.
 
The Calabash Protectorate has elected to vote against repealing this legislation.
We also firmly acknowledge that the wording and laws contained in resolution GA # 286 (Reproductive Freedoms) are not well formulated and require extensive amendments to avoid violation of civil rights.
 
Against. - Although I acknowledge that the petitioner has raised valid points about the wording in GA # 286, I would not support what I believe to be unnecessary harm to civil liberties by repealing the act.
 
If one wanted to change, in good faith, the authorisation procedures for abortions so to remove the requirement for parental approval, would not the easiest and least destructive way to do that be repeal and replacement of the Patients' Rights Act?
 
I mean I'm not going to lie and say that the purpose is to repeal the resolution on its principle. I don't think anyone buys the written intent.
 
Against. As the bill Access to Abortion is already in queue for going to a vote and appears to fix the issues with GA#286, there's no point in repealing GA#286 just to potentially bring it back with the other bill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top