|
|
| Re: US appeals court upholds new Texas abortion rules (1170193) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: US appeals court upholds new Texas abortion rules |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Sat Apr 5 13:50:41 2014, in response to Re: US appeals court upholds new Texas abortion rules, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Apr 5 13:30:22 2014. Ok, so you missed my point here, but I'm more dignified than to insult you for it.OK, so what was your point, exactly? Yes it does. I invite you into my car, decide on a moment's notice I don't want you in my car anymore, and so kill you because it's faster and safer than asking you to step out. Sound ok to you? That analogy just doesn't work. See, my point earlier was that ownership of property is not the same thing as bodily autonomy. Asking someone not to sit in your car is not the same as asking them not to feed off your body. If you were being pursued by a werewolf who was trying to bite you so that'd you'd become a werewolf yourself, you probably wouldn't think twice about loading the silver bullet. Ok, so what if the person in my car can't understand me, and is too big to be pushed out? You're really reaching here. First of all, if he can't understand you, how did you invite him into your car in the first place? If he simply stepped in of his own volition without asking you first, then you seriously need to take a step back and think about how this might apply to pregnancy. The car analogy does work because you're turning the human body into a commodity of ownership. The woman "owns" her body (just another way of phrasing bodily autonomy). As soon as you begin to speak in those terms, all analogies of ownership are on the table. That's not true. Referring to bodily autonomy as "ownership" of your body is an analogy that helps people understand the concept, but it's not the same thing as property ownership. The key distinction, of course, is that your right to control your body is absolute. No claim on it is valid, and no contract for it is enforceable. You can sell your car, but you can't sell your body; even if you agree to an imposition on your body, you can withdraw your consent at any time. That's why slavery is illegal even for people who would voluntarily sell themselves. Speaking of which, you didn't answer my earlier question— if a woman agrees to have sex, but after she's started, she changes her mind and says "no," is the man obligated to stop as soon as she tells him to? The cat embryo ruse does not assist your argument. But thanks. Oh, thank you. Watching you fall for it twice was the most hilarious thing ever. BTW, come down from another planet and look at a picture of a newborn baby and then that same person in their 80s or 90s. Would you think they are the same species, let alone the same person? Even as a human, I probably couldn't tell that they're the same individual, but if I were an alien, I'd probably be able to identify them as the same species. Assuming, of course, that I had eyes that pick up the same wavelengths of light and a visual cortex that works about the same way as a human's does and so forth. |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|