Hypothetical question

[OceanBlues1]

You are the dictator. You have the power to make law and have it enforced on your say so.

A woman is 8 months pregnant. Both she and the child are quite healthy. She is happily married to a loving and stable husband, has a supportive extended family, and is well-off financially. There is every reason to believe that both she and the child will prosper and flourish.

The mother wants to abort the child. Would you, as dictator, allow her to abort?

Last time I checked, elective abortions aren't done in the 8th month of pregnancy. At that stage, abortions are only done in the event of a compelling medical emergency, not just because the woman doesn't want to be pregnant any longer.

So IMO the question isn't relevant.

 

[Bodi]

Last time I checked, elective abortions aren't done in the 8th month of pregnancy. At that stage, abortions are only done in the event of a compelling medical emergency, not just because the woman doesn't want to be pregnant any longer.

So IMO the question isn't relevant.

You need to really toughen up if you want to be a dictator.

 

[Lisa]

If I was dictator I would have had her on birth control.

Mandating birth control for others is an interesting statement for someone who claims to be a libertarian.


If you don't get a elective abortion in the first 20-22 weeks then abortion should only be permitted in a medical situation where the life of the mother or the child is at risk unless there are extenuating circumstances such as rape, incest or the person was not permitted to make that decision because of the actions of others.

I would rather the state pay for elective abortions than to force any women to carry the fetus to term and be required to raise a child that isn't want or she cannot afford because the costs of an abortion is much cheaper than 18+ years of the social safety net. . Id much rather that effective artificial birth control be provided at no cost to those who cannot afford it than abortion but birth control is not 100% effective so abortion must always be an option to any women who would choose it.

 

[Noodlegawd]

You are the dictator. You have the power to make law and have it enforced on your say so.

A woman is 8 months pregnant. Both she and the child are quite healthy. She is happily married to a loving and stable husband, has a supportive extended family, and is well-off financially. There is every reason to believe that both she and the child will prosper and flourish.

The mother wants to abort the child.

Would you, as dictator, allow her to abort?

I would take a vote of all my subjects. I'd require every adult to vote. If the majority voted in favor of allowing the abortion, then I would allow it. If the majority voted against it, I would require each of those who voted against it to pay me all of their income for the remaining time in the woman's the pregnancy. Then I would offer all the money I expected to collect to the mother if she decides to have the child. But I wouldn't prohibit her from having the abortion.

 

[Jason Warfield]

Well, the premise of this was badly written and rather stupid. Tell you what, I'll ignore that you used incorrect terms and are ignoring basic biology and social sciences, but I'll take a couple whacks at this mole.

As dictator, I would allow abortions to be legal as long as (and I believe someone listed this before) ALL relevant information for family planning is presented and available. Further, contraception would be free and under the universal healthcare system that I would set up, abortions will be available. While I would allow freedom of religion, anyone firebombing clinics, vandalizing, attacking/killing patients and abortion doctors in the name of whatever religion would serve pretty stiff jail sentences. And since I am dictator, i will have total veto power over any law that tries to limit or outlaw abortions.

Now, let's go in the other direction.

As dictator, I would allow abortions for medical, rape or instances of incest. If I decided that at 8 months, unless a medical emergency, there can be no abortions, then as dictator I will require a portion of taxpayer money to go towards making sure the child has proper shelter, food, clothing, care and education. If we, and I, demand the child be born, then we will ALL help in raising if need be...even if you as a citizen doesn't have a child, your taxes will go to the care of the children anyway.

 

[OceanBlues1]

You need to really toughen up if you want to be a dictator.

No thanks; I don't want to be a dictator. eace

 

[Triton]

If she wants the abortion at that point, I have no reason to believe that the child would prosper and flourish. There must be another issue at play which is not mentioned. It is simply an unrealistic scenario.

 

[calamity]

You are the dictator. You have the power to make law and have it enforced on your say so.

A woman is 8 months pregnant. Both she and the child are quite healthy. She is happily married to a loving and stable husband, has a supportive extended family, and is well-off financially. There is every reason to believe that both she and the child will prosper and flourish.

The mother wants to abort the child.

Would you, as dictator, allow her to abort?

Yep. Her body, her choice. The "kid" has no rights until it breathes air.

I still do not understand why this even needs to be debated.

 

[Gator]

Mandating birth control for others is an interesting statement for someone who claims to be a libertarian.


If you don't get a elective abortion in the first 20-22 weeks then abortion should only be permitted in a medical situation where the life of the mother or the child is at risk unless there are extenuating circumstances such as rape, incest or the person was not permitted to make that decision because of the actions of others.

I would rather the state pay for elective abortions than to force any women to carry the fetus to term and be required to raise a child that isn't want or she cannot afford because the costs of an abortion is much cheaper than 18+ years of the social safety net. . Id much rather that effective artificial birth control be provided at no cost to those who cannot afford it than abortion but birth control is not 100% effective so abortion must always be an option to any women who would choose it.

Libertarians are not dictators, either. It was a hypothetical. A libertarian would not restrict abortion or have the government pay for it.

Where do you get the 20-22 week period? Viability? Why would it be wrong to abort at 25 weeks but not if it was rape or incest?

 

[Lisa]

Libertarians are not dictators, either. It was a hypothetical. A libertarian would not restrict abortion or have the government pay for it.

Where do you get the 20-22 week period? Viability? Why would it be wrong to abort at 25 weeks but not if it was rape or incest?

The baseline concept of Roe decision is fetal viability or the ability tio survive outside the uterus without heroic medical intervention. That concept has long been determined to be 22-24 weeks of gestation.

In its landmark 1973 abortion decision, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a constitutional right to abortion, but held that states could prohibit abortion after fetal viability—the point at which a fetus can sustain life outside the womb—if their policies met certain requirements. Since then, the Supreme Court has consistently reaffirmed the fundamental right to abortion while also allowing new limits on a woman’s ability to obtain one. The composition of the Court became more conservative after the appointment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, and more states are expected to challenge the protections of Roe v. Wade by limiting abortion at earlier stages of pregnancy.

The current U.S. Supreme Court standard holds that states may prohibit abortion after fetal viability so long as there are exceptions for the life and health (both physical and mental) of the woman. Under this legal standard, viability—which can range from 24 to 28 weeks after the start of the woman’s last menstrual period (LMP) —must be determined on an individual basis, and determinations of both fetal viability and the woman’s health are at the discretion of the patient’s physician. In addition, states may not require that additional physicians confirm an attending physician’s judgment that the woman’s life or health is at risk in cases of medical emergency.

State Bans on Abortion Throughout Pregnancy | Guttmacher Institute

 

[Atreus21]

You are a dictator and a potato wants to gain sentience. You have the power to grant it but since it does does not have the ability to think, reason or communicate, you do not know what it wants. Do you grant sentience?

I don't understand. The potato in your hypothetical is incapable of thought, reason, or communication, yet it wants to gain sentience?

I don't mind weird hypotheticals like some here, but I do ask that they have some internal logic. You're essentially saying something that can't think can think.

 

[Atreus21]

If she is 8 months pregnant when she could give birth early.
It would have the same impact on the mother, and there is a chance the child could survive.

Right. Suppose her exact purpose was that the child not survive, and thus she consents to an abortion but not induced labor or a C-section so as to save the baby.

It's her body, and her choice. Her choice is to abort, not give birth to a live baby. Do we honor her choice?

 

[Atreus21]

Last time I checked, elective abortions aren't done in the 8th month of pregnancy. At that stage, abortions are only done in the event of a compelling medical emergency, not just because the woman doesn't want to be pregnant any longer.

So IMO the question isn't relevant.

Just suppose she did. A hypothetical doesn't have to be relevant or even strictly-speaking possible. It just needs to be coherent.

 

[Lursa]

Right. Suppose her exact purpose was that the child not survive, and thus she consents to an abortion but not induced labor or a C-section so as to save the baby.

It's her body, and her choice. Her choice is to abort, not give birth a live baby. Do we honor her choice?

Previously answered:

Are you suggesting that women abort for no reason? :doh What the hell kind of country is that?

A late term abortion like that is medically more dangerous and more painful to the woman. (She does not dilate naturally, for one thing.) It's simulated labor anyway.

In the US, a woman could get at least $20,000 for a healthy infant in a private abortion. Again...why on earth would she abort?

You have created a convenient fantasy that has zero foundation in reality.

Your status as an low-information poster on this issue is now on the record.​

Just because a woman doesnt share her reasons doesnt mean she doesnt have them. They are none of anyone else's business.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[Lursa]

Just suppose she did. A hypothetical doesn't have to be relevant or even strictly-speaking possible. It just needs to be coherent.

A hypothetical still needs to be valid, not a fanstasy.

Your assumption that a woman would abort *for no reason* is as ridiculous as a person having an appendectomy for no reason.

It's a (disturbing) personal fantasy of convenience for you...it does not reflect reality in the least. You might as well have posted, "should a dictator allow a woman to go to Mars to give birth?" :doh

Should we have laws that say it's illegal to ride unicorns when unicorns dont even exist? Yes or no? That's about as rational a scenario as you posted.​

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[Scrabaholic]

In the US, a woman could get at least $20,000 for a healthy infant in a private abortion. Again...why on earth would she abort?

I think you meant to say a private adoption.

 

[Lursa]

I think you meant to say a private adoption.

Ack! Thanks for the correction!

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[Atreus21]

A hypothetical still needs to be valid, not a fanstasy.

Fantasies, as in imaginary scenarios, are exactly what comprise hypotheticals.

Your assumption that a woman would abort *for no reason* is as ridiculous as a person having an appendectomy for no reason.

It's a (disturbing) personal fantasy of convenience for you...it does not reflect reality in the least. You might as well have posted, "should a dictator allow a woman to go to Mars to give birth?" :doh​

It doesn't matter that it's ridiculous. I could walk into surgery this instant and get an appendectomy for no reason. I could take a steak knife and attempt the surgery on myself without anaesthetic, and cook the excised appendix and serve it to the dog afterward. None of this has to be reasonable or rational. It just has to be free of nonsensical contradictions like "The circle was square-shaped."

Should we have laws that say it's illegal to ride unicorns when unicorns dont even exist? Yes or no? That's about as rational a scenario as you posted.

No, we shouldn't because unicorns don't exist as far as we know. But if they did exist, it would depend on the law.

 

[Lursa]

Fantasies, as in imaginary scenarios, are exactly what comprise hypotheticals.

Since you countered this yourself at the end of the post, I think we can say you are wrong here.

It doesn't matter that it's ridiculous. I could walk into surgery this instant and get an appendectomy for no reason. I could take a steak knife and attempt the surgery on myself without anaesthetic, and cook the excised appendix and serve it to the dog afterward. None of this has to be reasonable or rational. It just has to be free of nonsensical contradictions like "The circle was square-shaped."

No you cant. However you can get one because you are going to be away from medical attention for a long period of time. But for no reason? Why would someone do that :mrgreen: Not only that, no Dr would be forced to perform it.

Your comment on performing your own appendectomy is outside of the hypothetical...you didnt say a woman couldnt perform her own.

(And yes, same applies to abortion)

No, we shouldn't because unicorns don't exist as far as we know. But if they did exist, it would depend on the law.

Thank you. Such abortions as you describe dont 'exist', they dont take place. So we shouldnt have to consider your fantastical hypothetical either.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[LadyMoonlight]

Of course I did. Under no circumstances would I ever want a healthy woman to have a full-term healthy fetus aborted. But the question is only smart if you use the word fetus instead of child.

You would deny her choice to abort? Doesn't matter the gestation time or condition of the pre-born baby, if you support abortion - the woman's choice to have an abortion - then you should be fully supportive of her choice to abort whenever and for whatever reasons SHE wants. Isn't that the way it works?

 

[weaver2]

You are the dictator. You have the power to make law and have it enforced on your say so.
A woman is 8 months pregnant. Both she and the child are quite healthy. She is happily married to a loving and stable husband, has a supportive extended family, and is well-off financially. There is every reason to believe that both she and the child will prosper and flourish.
The mother wants to abort the child.
Would you, as dictator, allow her to abort?

If you are going to fantasize, why propose something completely and utterly stupid? With extraordinary power comes extraordinary responsibility. We already have one leader that acts like an asshole. Try something different. Dictate something intelligent, useful, helpful, and realistic.

 

[Atreus21]

Since you countered this yourself at the end of the post, I think we can say you are wrong here.

No you cant. However you can get one because you are going to be away from medical attention for a long period of time. But for no reason? Why would someone do that :mrgreen: Not only that, no Dr would be forced to perform it.

Your comment on performing your own appendectomy is outside of the hypothetical...you didnt say a woman couldnt perform her own.

(And yes, same applies to abortion)

Thank you. Such abortions as you describe dont 'exist', they dont take place. So we shouldnt have to consider your fantastical hypothetical either.

My wife is 8 months pregnant. If she went to an abortion clinic capable of such a procedure to acquire an abortion, she'd be within her legal rights to do so, correct?

 

[Patriotic Voter]

You would deny her choice to abort? Doesn't matter the gestation time or condition of the pre-born baby, if you support abortion - the woman's choice to have an abortion - then you should be fully supportive of her choice to abort whenever and for whatever reasons SHE wants. Isn't that the way it works?

Women do not wait until the fetus is viable to decide whether they want to have a baby or not. By "healthy" I meant the fetus has no severe congenital defects; she has no pregnancy complications; and doctors have not advised her to consider aborting her fetus for medical reasons.

Being pro-choice does not mean no restrictions on abortion are acceptable. There is a range of opinions among "pro-choice" advocates.

 

[Atreus21]

Women do not wait until the fetus is viable to decide whether they want to have a baby or not. By "healthy" I meant the fetus has no severe congenital defects; she has no pregnancy complications; and doctors have not advised her to consider aborting her fetus for medical reasons.

Being pro-choice does not mean no restrictions on abortion are acceptable. There is a range of opinions among "pro-choice" advocates.

Part of the purpose of this hypothetical was to determine if abortion proponents are willing to accept restrictions on the practice - in this case, when there are no health problems, no poverty problems, and the child is advanced in development.

 

[Lursa]

My wife is 8 months pregnant. If she went to an abortion clinic capable of such a procedure to acquire an abortion, she'd be within her legal rights to do so, correct?

Yes in many states.

Did you not know that? I'm guessing you are desperately attempting to set up a 'gotcha' here? It's pretty obviously that your entire OP is supposed to be such. (And failed)

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa