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: Women's Freedom of Choice Act

Details

Submitted by^[?]: Freedom Party

Status^[?]: defeated

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 2072

Description^[?]:

Women should be able to abort in the third trimester when a continued pregnancy or a birth would result in physical and/or mental harm to the mother and/or fetus/child.

Proposals

Article 1

Proposal^[?] to change Policy on the legality of abortions

Old value:: Abortion is allowed during the first and second trimesters.

Current: All abortions are illegal.

Proposed: Abortion is allowed during the entire course of the pregnancy.

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date	19:25:09, June 25, 2005 CET
From	Fair Capitalism Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	This is inhumane! This means that, while IN LABOUR, the baby can be aborted. If that isn't murder, what is?

Date	19:45:10, June 25, 2005 CET
From	Social Conservative Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	Oef, at least I'm not allone when it goes that far.

Date	20:09:27, June 25, 2005 CET
From	Freedom Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	This does not, I believe, include labour. Once the mother in labour the fetus becomes a baby.

Date	20:33:22, June 25, 2005 CET
From	Free Democratic Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	The foetus can survive outside the womb at any time during the third trimester. To deny it its basic right to life is nothing short of murder. This is no different to killing a two month old baby.

Date	20:55:16, June 25, 2005 CET
From	Freedom Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	"Women should be able to abort in the third trimester when a continued pregnancy or a birth would result in physical and/or mental harm to the mother and/or fetus/child."

Date	23:00:52, June 25, 2005 CET
From	Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	No

Date	23:03:29, June 25, 2005 CET
From	Freedom Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	Gah.

Date	23:22:10, June 25, 2005 CET
From	Social Conservative Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	If it was really the description we'd be voting on, it would be a hard call. However, the proposal is written way more radical. And in the end, it's the proposal that counts.

Date	23:37:11, June 25, 2005 CET
From	Freedom Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	head + desk

Date	00:12:21, June 26, 2005 CET
From	Freedom Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	Right. This is going to vote now.

Date	01:09:25, June 26, 2005 CET
From	Freedom Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	Anyone wanna vote for this? The Libertarian Party the AGSP? The WDU?

Date	14:53:55, June 26, 2005 CET
From	Aloria Green Socialist Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	Hell no.

Date	17:35:07, June 26, 2005 CET
From	Fair Capitalism Party
To	Debating the Women's Freedom of Choice Act
Message	Likewise.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote

Seats

yes

Workers Democratic Union (48)
Freedom Party (7)

Total Seats: 55

Total Seats: 275

abstain

Libertarian Party (43)
Imperial Restoration Party (27)

Total Seats: 70

Random fact: Periodically, it is a good idea to go through your nation's Treaties and arrange to withdraw from any that are unwanted.

Random quote: "If we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people to not kill each other? Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want." - Mother Teresa of Calcutta quotes

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 79