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: Freedom of choice for Women act 2182
Details
Submitted by[?]: Likaton Fascist Front
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: April 2184
Description[?]:
| Kristin Lund has proposed the following for consideration. We feel that a woman has a right to determine the choices she wishes to make about her body. We also feel that we should support the concept of birth by choice and that to consider otherwise is to place unfair restraints on women. 'Unwanted children' are two words that should never be seen in the same sentance. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Policy on the legality of abortions
Old value:: Abortion is allowed during the first trimester.
Current: Abortion is allowed during the first and second trimesters.
Proposed: Abortion is allowed during the entire course of the pregnancy.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 02:59:19, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | AM AAP endorses the sentiments of AM PSS. |
| Date | 04:21:40, February 09, 2006 CET | From | AM RIP Tetragrammaton | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | The thought of completely an unregulated abortion law makes us feel a little uneasy. |
| Date | 04:26:18, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | Oh, the AM AAP agrees. However, we would rather err on the side of more permissive, rather than less... and Likatonia HAS had a history which is less than charitable to the rights of women. AM AAP is happy we have SOME abortion freedom... and we would like to see more. We might not automatically approve third trimester abortions... but we believe it IS important to set the bar THAT side of the issue, rather than the 'women as incubators' side. |
| Date | 04:43:13, February 09, 2006 CET | From | AM RIP Tetragrammaton | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | We would support first and second trimester. |
| Date | 04:49:38, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | Am AAP may introduce such legislation, depending on the response to the bill pushed by our allies in the AM PSS. |
| Date | 07:22:42, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | We support. |
| Date | 14:57:45, February 09, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | We oppose any change in this direction, especially one which will allow the disposal of a viable human being such as would exits in the third trimester. |
| Date | 16:08:16, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | We will support. |
| Date | 16:59:25, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | What about the father? Why does the father have absolutely no say in the matter? How can a child be unwanted if the parents had unprotected sex? That shows a desire to have a child, therefore any murder of the subsequent child is wrong. |
| Date | 17:14:05, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | But who says it was unprotected? Most women who seek abortion were already using a form of contraception in the first place. |
| Date | 17:18:48, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | Good points made by our allies in the AM SLP. It is, perhaps, worth noting that: for the most part, the parties that are MOST strident in opposing abortion, are the SAME parties that try hardest to remove access to contraception.... meaning they foster the very culture of 'accidental' and 'unwanted' children, that they claim to despise so much. |
| Date | 18:02:59, February 09, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | If, by some chance, AM AAP may have been referring to the RLP, we do not wish to remove access to contraception. We only wish to remove the government from distorting the market for contraception. Should there ever be a bill actually limiting or denying access to contraception, we would be in the forefront of the resistance. |
| Date | 18:28:34, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | We just love people having lots of children, it secures the future of our nation, without having to resort to immigration, or giving the vote to domesticated animals. |
| Date | 21:07:22, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | Not necessarily. A family with two fully educated children is far better off than a family with six undereducated children with regards to the future of our nation. |
| Date | 05:26:53, February 10, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | The AM AAP would like to inform our libertarian allies in the AM RLP, that they were in no way referenced in comments the AM AAP made. We have always considered the Radical Libertarians to be one of the most socially progressive parties in the Likatonian 'Politscape'. |
| Date | 11:27:47, February 10, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | SLP thats a generalization, and a bad one at that. Besides, having two children only just eplaces the parents, without leaving any room for those who have had one child, or none at all. The family with six have doe their country a greater service. |
| Date | 16:25:21, February 10, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Freedom of choice for Women act 2182 |
| Message | The AM AAP has to side with the AM SLP, here... If we have 'quantity' in the next generation, but no QUALITY, then our nation is in a worse state than it is today. Perhaps we SHOULD focus on a smaller population, at a sustainable level that we can actually maintain? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 298 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 164 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 38 |
| Random fact: Check out the forum regularly for game news. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "The free market is ugly and stupid, like going to the mall; the unfree market is just as ugly and just as stupid, except there is nothing in the mall, and if you don't go there, they shoot you." - P. J. O'Rourke |