We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Life protection act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Christian Democrat Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 2898
Description[?]:
| Abortion takes the life of an innocent child, therefore abortion = murder. Murder should be forbidden by law. Simples |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Policy on the legality of abortions
Old value:: Abortion is allowed during the first and second trimesters.
Current: Abortion is allowed during the first and second trimesters.
Proposed: Abortions are only allowed in medical emergencies.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 08:10:18, February 23, 2010 CET | From | Throne of Immeressen | To | Debating the Life protection act |
| Message | There are no children in abortion - Fail on one premise. Abortion takes no life - Fail on two premises. Murder is illegal removal of human life, abortion is the termination of a pregnancy - Fail on two more premises. Murder is already forbidden by law - Fail on one more premise. One Bill, one article - five fails. That's a lot of fail per article. |
| Date | 15:16:44, February 23, 2010 CET | From | Christian Democrat Party | To | Debating the Life protection act |
| Message | We contest that there are no children in abortion, the word 'fetus' comes from the Latin meaning 'offspring' i.e. children. We also contest that abortion takes no life. Biologically speaking, a human life begins at the moment of conception and so should be protected by law from intentional acts of killing (which is what I meant by murder, I apologise if murder by definition is against the law). We do not technically object to the termination of pregnancy, but we object to the unavoidable consequence of abortion in the death of a child. Websters medical dictionary defines abortion as "the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus". The death of a child is part of the act of abortion and so must be prevented. If it were possible for a pregnancy to be terminated without killing the child we would support it, but at present such a situation is impossible. We put to you the question of why does abortion take no life. When does life begin? The most consistent and scientific answer is to say from the moment of conception. You may say that we cannot be sure when life begins, in which case we must prevent abortion to stop the risk of human life being taken. |
| Date | 16:09:15, February 23, 2010 CET | From | Throne of Immeressen | To | Debating the Life protection act |
| Message | If we're going to be strictly scientific - there is no 'moment' of conception - fertilisation itself is a process that takes several hours, and it's days before the resulting mess finalises as one, two or three cells. Which means that - up until days after conception starts - one fertilised egg can be up to three offspring. Thus, it is completely ILLOGICAL to assume that a human life can be tracked from that point - unless you're going to argue that one human life can somehow also be MORE THAN one. So - at what point does 'living tissue' become something we can call 'a human life'? Well, that has to be the point at which it stops just being tissue, and becomes capable of sensory interaction - which has to be the formation of COHERENT function in the brain mass - or, at about 20 weeks. If we're going to be purely scientific about it. |
| Date | 22:21:34, February 23, 2010 CET | From | Christian Democrat Party | To | Debating the Life protection act |
| Message | What you deem to be illogical is what is accepted by mainstream science and embryologists. Life begins after the process of fertilisation. Your alternatives to the question of when life begins are not reasonable, if I went into a coma I would be incapable of sensory interaction yet I would surely be no less human. It is also a rough and ambigious guide to where life begins, which we can never be sure where it is - rather the comparitively clear guide of fertilisation. If you believe that life begins at roughly 20 weeks, we take it that you oppose the current law as the 2nd trimester spans longer than 20 weeks. |
| Date | 03:12:57, February 24, 2010 CET | From | Throne of Immeressen | To | Debating the Life protection act |
| Message | The CDP are incorrect - embryologists will not tell you that 'a human life' begins after the process of fertilisation. They'll tell you that the cell is 'living', but that's not the same as saying it is 'a human life'. Cancers are 'living' cells, but they arent people. Similarly, you slipping into a coma is not going to mean a loss of 'coherent brain function' - although it will limit sensory awareness, and consciousness. When coherent brain function ceases in humans, we call it 'braindeath', and we use it as the categorical marker for the end of human life. Which is why the commencement of coherent brain function isn't just 'reasonable' - it's the ONLY reasonable measure. If we're going to be purely scientific - which the CDP invoked, but doesn't seem to want to actually follow. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 391 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 275 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In your Message Centre there is a really useful feature which allows you to subscribe to all of the bill debates in your nation. If you use that, then the "Watched Discussions" section will show you every time a new message has been posted on a bill. You can also subscribe to other pages you want to follow, such as your nation message-board, party organisations or bills outside your nation which you are interested in. |
| Random quote: "Don't listen to what the Communists say, but look at what they do." - Nguyen Van Thieu |