"It's my body"[W:191, 709]

[Penrod]

Re: "It's my body"

1. Yes did you even bother to read what I wrote :lol:? I admit the unborn are humans but persons? NOPE I don't agree with that. And if you don't know the difference between ''person'' and ''human'' I suggest you start reading about the topic. Start from these, www.psych.upenn.edu/~mfarah/Neuroethics-Personhood.pdf and Stem cell research, personhood and sentience | Lisa Bortolotti - Academia.edu there are many others out there as well.

2. It depends it does come in degrees you know. Health and psychology: Mental Retardation. Do remember that a lack of a right to life does not equal a death sentence just so you know. If there are those who are welling to take care of what they want then so have it then.

Then why are you charged with murder if you kill one in many states? Very conservative my butt. You sound more like a progressive with this eugenics nonsense.

 

[Penrod]

Re: "It's my body"

It becomes "a" human being when it is no longer inside the woman, just as there are two distinct cells at the point that the process of cell division is over, not when there are two nuclei but the process isn't over.

Wow so until it has been born even up to the minute before its ok to kill it? You need help

 

[prometeus]

Re: "It's my body"

So people on life support should die?

Should is not the question. Life support is routinely disconnected when the majority organs shut down. Earl;y term fetuses have NO ORGANS at all.

And the age where the3y become viable keeps decreasing.

Not really. Technology that can keep premature born alive and is improving but that does not change the reality that the fetus can not sustain its own life functions.

So when exactly does this miracle occur? Admit it. You have no idea.

I need not know exactly. What is known is that it does not happen by the end of the first trimester and that is when by far, most elective abortions are done.

 

[Penrod]

Re: "It's my body"

Should is not the question. Life support is routinely disconnected when the majority organs shut down. Earl;y term fetuses have NO ORGANS at all.

Not really. Technology that can keep premature born alive and is improving but that does not change the reality that the fetus can not sustain its own life functions.

I need not know exactly. What is known is that it does not happen by the end of the first trimester and that is when by far, most elective abortions are done.

Its the question I am asking

So any fetus that would need life support is fair game for abortion ? Are not those born prematurely routinely in need of that? Can you deny that the age at which a fetus has become viable has gone down? Or maybe you have a different definition of viable.
And what of those in the third?

 

[choiceone]

Re: "It's my body"

So people on life support should die? And the age where the3y become viable keeps decreasing. So when exactly does this miracle occur? Admit it. You have no idea.

You misunderstand. People on life support are using machines that are available for the support of all persons, just as people breathing and taking in food are using oxygen and nutrients from sources that are available for the support of all persons, but embryos and fetuses aren't doing that.

Embryos and fetuses are using womens' bodies, and they are getting oxygen and nutrients from womens' bloodstreams. Other persons' bodies and blood are not available for the support of persons without the consent of the persons to whom the bodies and blood belong.

You are talking as though you think a woman's body is nothing but a mindless non-organic machine that just anyone can use without her consent and that her blood resources can be used by anyone without her consent. We don't allow any person the right to use another person's body or blood resources without that person's initial AND ongoing consent, not even that person's born kids. Even if an embryo were a person, it wouldn't have that right.

 

[Penrod]

Re: "It's my body"

You misunderstand. People on life support are using machines that are available for the support of all persons, just as people breathing and taking in food are using oxygen and nutrients from sources that are available for the support of all persons, but embryos and fetuses aren't doing that.

Embryos and fetuses are using womens' bodies, and they are getting oxygen and nutrients from womens' bloodstreams. Other persons' bodies and blood are not available for the support of persons without the consent of the persons to whom the bodies and blood belong.

You are talking as though you think a woman's body is nothing but a mindless non-organic machine that just anyone can use without her consent and that her blood resources can be used by anyone without her consent. We don't allow any person the right to use another person's body or blood resources without that person's initial AND ongoing consent, not even that person's born kids. Even if an embryo were a person, it wouldn't have that right.

And your talking like a fetus is just a lump of cells. If you dont want kids either dont have sex or use contraception. Its not like the fetus asked to be there.

 

[choiceone]

Re: "It's my body"

Wow so until it has been born even up to the minute before its ok to kill it? You need help

I'm not talking ethics. I'm talking law. In actual fact, however, the longer a pregnancy continues, the more dangerous abortion is for the woman, and after 24 weeks, there is no question that only a medical professional would be fit to gauge whether abortion, induced labor, or a caesarian would be more dangerous.

Canada has no restrictions on late term abortion, yet the rate of late term abortion in Canada is the same as that in the US, and Oregon has no restrictions on late term abortion, but doctors perform very few late term abortions there. Almost no doctors would perform an abortion past perhaps four-five weeks beyond 24 and that has nothing to do with the law - it's about medical judgment and medical ethics. The issue is, should idiotic legislators and ignoramuses decide or should a medical professional decide?

You don't seem to understand that by the time 24 weeks is reached, legal abortions are performed either because the woman's life or major health functions are seriously threatened or the fetus is dead or a serious fetal anomaly or a fetus with such serious disabilities that it is not going to survive for more than, say, 24 hours.

Virtually all women who have late-term abortions are women who wanted their pregnancies and were happy to continue their pregnancies until they had to face a medical disaster. The only exceptions are likely to be cases like kidnapped and imprisoned pregnant rape victims who were able to escape captivity only at or after 24 weeks, or 11 year old rape victims whose stupid parents and doctors failed to grasp that they were pregnant before 24 weeks, or girls or women whose access to abortion was severely restricted by poverty or the dirth of clinics within reasonable access distance, etc.

So the anti-choice image of the "selfish" abortion for "inconvenience" doesn't apply after 24 weeks even where abortion is not restricted then. The doctors perform abortions then to save women's lives, save women who already have other toddlers to care for from being permanently paralyzed, or in situations of extreme fetal or family tragedy.

We understand that some anti-choice people don't care if the woman dies or is permanently paralyzed, or if the child born would live for at most 24 hours past birth in constant pain that doctors could not alleviate, or if the fetus would be stillborn or born with no brain. We get it. We're just not that callous toward women and their husbands and parents and already born offspring. We think such situations are for families and their doctors to decide, not some callous stranger who could care less about everyone in that family and merely stands on abstract principle without regard for reality.

 

[choiceone]

Re: "It's my body"

And your talking like a fetus is just a lump of cells. If you dont want kids either dont have sex or use contraception. Its not like the fetus asked to be there.

Truth is, many accidental pregnancies result from contraceptive failure. And there are women who are physiologically incapable of carrying a pregnancy to term without massive damage to their health or great risk of life. If a man loves her and wants to marry her anyway and she loves him and wants to marry him anyway, you are saying they should not get married and have sex, because a one week embryo is more important than their enduring love and a right to have an intimate marriage. If their serious attempts to thwart pregnancy fail, why should that woman have to be seriously damaged or drop dead?

I don't agree, because I honestly don't think zygotes or blastocysts are important, given how many of them never even come to successful implantation, and I don't even think embryos are very important, given how many of them come to an end in spontaneous abortion/miscarriage.

But most of all, I'm not talking about the same thing you are, because I am talking about the law. The law is human and secular and designed to cover all possible cases via generality. And here I will support the woman's rights against the power of the state and say that abortion is a matter between a woman and her doctor and her God and is private.

You as a stranger have neither the qualifications nor actual concern for that individual woman and her family, because all you care about is potential human life, and you care about it more than actual human life. You prove it by writing as if you personally have the right to force a woman to function as a mechanical life support machine, no matter what may happen to her or her family, and if she refuses to do so, you personally have the right to usurp the place of God and cast her into hell because you are holier than anyone except a fetus.

And PS, I stopped having sex over thirty years ago when I overcame the socialization this society imposed on girls and at last understood that I didn't want kids and really didn't want to marry. I stopped dating and never changed my mind. There were moments when I thought I might change my mind, and then the mere existence of men like you made me know I was right.

 

[prometeus]

Re: "It's my body"

And your talking like a fetus is just a lump of cells.

It is for quite some time.

 

[Penrod]

Re: "It's my body"

You don't seem to understand that by the time 24 weeks is reached, legal abortions are performed either because the woman's life or major health functions are seriously threatened or the fetus is dead or a serious fetal anomaly or a fetus with such serious disabilities that it is not going to survive for more than, say, 24 hours

And how about all the illegal abortions

You don't seem to understand that by the time 24 weeks is reached, legal abortions are performed either because the woman's life or major health functions are seriously threatened or the fetus is dead or a serious fetal anomaly or a fetus with such serious disabilities that it is not going to survive for more than, say, 24 hours

Talk about BS. You do realize that abortion was legal in every state in the Union before roe vs wade for those reasons, if the life of the mother is endangered you may abort. Its been that way since before i was born and no pro lifer I know wants to change that Like most lefties you try to demonize those who dont agree with you with lies

 

[prometeus]

Re: "It's my body"

Then why are you charged with murder if you kill one in many states?

Because of bad laws. It is not the first or last.
Have you read any of those laws?

 

[Penrod]

Re: "It's my body"

It is for quite some time.

Cells that are becoming a human being

 

[Penrod]

Re: "It's my body"

Because of bad laws. It is not the first or last.
Have you read any of those laws?

Says you. Hey can anyone abort a fetus or does it have to be a DR? Also how is it the vast majority of Drs will not perform abortions.

 

[minnie616]

Re: "It's my body"

Its the question I am asking

So any fetus that would need life support is fair game for abortion ? Are not those born prematurely routinely in need of that? Can you deny that the age at which a fetus has become viable has gone down? Or maybe you have a different definition of viable.
And what of those in the third?

The Roe vs Wade definition of viability included medical equipment such as infant CPAPS or neo natal units.

The limit of viability ( when 50 percent of premies survive even though major disabilities remain high ) when Roe vs Wade was decided was about 28 weeks but the Justices did state it could be as low as 24 weeks.

They knew that because the infant CPAP machine had recently been invented and was helping premies as young as 24 weeks survive.

Now that infant CPAPs and neo natal units are widespread in the USA the limit of viability has been lowered to 24 weeks gestation.

The youngest premies to ever survive were 21 weeks and 5 or 6 days old.
They were considered medical miracles.

Most hospitals in the USA will not use neo natal units for a premie younger 23 weeks gestation.

They just give comfort care ( keeping them warm and out of pain ) until they expire naturally.
.

Third trimester abortions are very rare.
Less than .1 ( that is point 1 ) percent of all the legal abortions that take place in the USA
They are extreme cases.

They are the cases where the woman's life is at risk or irreparable damage to major bodily function ( such as paralysis from the neck down, heart attack, stroke, damage to a kidney , etc. ) would occur if the pregnancy continued, where the fetus would be stillborn or where it would be so malformed it would only live a few minutes or hours. ( if the fetus dies within the womb it needs to removed in a timely manner or the woman has a high risk of of developing a life threatening infection.)

There are only 4 doctors in the USA who perform legal abortions after the limit of viability ( 24 weeks gestation).
There are only a small handful of states that allow legal abortions after viability for these extreme cases.
Kansas is one of those states.

In 2008 OB/GYNs from all over the United States would send their patients with these extreme cases to Dr. Tiller in Kansas.

Kansas kept track of all abortion at or after 22 weeks gestation ( 24 weeks gestation is the limit of viability ).

There were 323 abortions at or after 22 weeks gestation in 2008.

192 were because the fetus was not viable.
( it would be stillborn or was so malformed it would not live more than few minutes or hours.

The other 131 were because there would be irreparable damage to a major bodiliy function if the pregnancy continued.

These were extreme cases.

 

[Ocean007]

Re: "It's my body"

And your talking like a fetus is just a lump of cells. If you dont want kids either dont have sex or use contraception. Its not like the fetus asked to be there.

NO contraceptive method has a 100% guarantee against unwanted pregnancy, so all of them can and DO fail occasionally. I use contraception regularly and carefully, since I don't EVER want pregnancy or children, and so far, so good, it has never let me down. However, other women who also use birth control haven't been so lucky. IF for any reason contraceptives become unavailable in future, THEN I will choose voluntary abstinence. For me, the rejection of dating and boyfriends is much better than being stuck with a baby I never wanted in the first place. Thankfully, for now at least, that won't be necessary.

In any case, each woman has the right to decide for HERSELF whether to continue a pregnancy or not. If it isn't YOUR pregnancy, meaning if YOU aren't the woman who is pregnant, it isn't your decision. Simple.

 

[prometeus]

Re: "It's my body"

Says you.

And a lot of other people, but what do you say about them, what is your interpretation?

Hey can anyone abort a fetus or does it have to be a DR? Also how is it the vast majority of Drs will not perform abortions.

It is a medical procedure so shoemakers will not do it well. As to why? Ask them as it is not relevant to the topic.

 

[prometeus]

Re: "It's my body"

Cells that are becoming a human being

So they WILL be, but what are they NOW?

 

[choiceone]

Re: "It's my body"

And how about all the illegal abortions


Talk about BS. You do realize that abortion was legal in every state in the Union before roe vs wade for those reasons, if the life of the mother is endangered you may abort. Its been that way since before i was born and no pro lifer I know wants to change that Like most lefties you try to demonize those who dont agree with you with lies

Actually, you're wrong. Before Roe v Wade, every state allowed abortion if there was a medically diagnosed imminent threat to a woman's life, but not if there was a medically diagnosed threat to her major health functions or a serious fetal anomaly or a fetus with such serious disabilities that it is diagnosed as not going to survive for more than a few hours.

Even now, though states are required to make an exception for a medically diagnosed threat to the woman's major health functions, they are free to ban abortion after 24 weeks in the case of a serious fetal anomaly or one with very serious disabilities that is diagnosed as not going to survive for more than a few hours after birth.

And the debate about banning abortion after 20 weeks in most states where it occurs is all about the problem of serious fetal anomalies and seriously disabled fetuses. I think Texas was an exception, as I recall that its anti-abortion bill of last year did make some kind of exception for seriously disabled fetuses - its focus was not on the 20 week limit, but on overregulation of abortion clinics in order to close most of them.

One reason there has been so much opposition to an earlier limit than the current 24 week limit on states' bans is precisely this issue of not making an exception in the case of seriously disabled fetuses or even serious fetal anomalies.

Sad for you, but most people who are left of the center political divide, i.e., center-left and not far left, tell the truth on this issue. It is the righties who are lying and getting caught in their lies on the issue of abortion.

Righties have made state laws to force abortion doctors to read to women seeking abortions prewritten scripts that contain scientifically inaccurate information which the majority of scientists and doctors know is inaccurate. So this is no longer about just rightie crisis pregnancy centers that use deceit toward women who come to them imagining that they are unbiased. This is about forcing scientifically credentially professionals to say with their own mouths what they know professionally to be untrue. Ick, ick, ick.

 

[choiceone]

Re: "It's my body"

Says you. Hey can anyone abort a fetus or does it have to be a DR? Also how is it the vast majority of Drs will not perform abortions.

Only a licensed doctor can perform an abortion according to law. The vast majority of doctors don't perform abortions because medicine is specialized, and most doctors are not ob/gyns. The majority of ob/gyns don't perform abortions for a different reason.

Before Roe v Wade, most abortion was illegal in almost all states, so after Roe v Wade, there weren't many ob/gyns who had been well trained to perform them. Ob/gyns made a lot of money in other areas of their specialization, especially that of pregnancy and childbirth, which is a very lucrative part of this specialization. Especially in states with larger anti-abortion populations, a lot of ob/gyns did not want to be associated with the image of the doctor who performed abortions, because it could cut into their lucrative pregnancy/childbirth practice by alienating anti-abortion people.

Meanwhile, some ob/gyns also performed abortions in hospitals as before. With not many ob/gyns performing abortions and abortions in hospitals being expensive, some ob/gyns chose to set up abortion clinics where abortions would be less expensive and the ob/gyns would be specialized. Other ob/gyns came to refer patients who sought abortions to abortion clinics run by experienced specialists.

In the 1990s, while the anti-abortion movement focused hostility on abortion clinics, medical professionals changed this scene. University hospitals developed better training programs and more and more ob/gyns were trained in abortions as part of their general training. They incorporated abortion into their more general ob/gyn practices. Some became university doctors, but others have come to provide abortion services as part of their more general practices at their clinics, and may have hospital privileges at university hospitals.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/magazine/18abortion-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I can't say, therefore, that the stereotype of the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s, the specialized abortion doctor at the specialized abortion clinic, is standard any more. More and more, abortion has been integrated into ob/gyn medical practice more generally, and at locations far less easy for anti-abortion forces to target.

 

[minnie616]

Re: "It's my body"

So people on life support should die? And the age where the3y become viable keeps decreasing. So when exactly does this miracle occur? Admit it. You have no idea.

Actually when the Roe vs Wade Justices defined viability as the ability for a premie to survive outside the womb with or without the aid of medical devices ( such as infant CPAPs and neo natal units ) they estimated viability to about 28 weeks gestation but that it could as early as 24 weeks gestation.

They knew the infant CPAP had recently been invented and was saving many premies between 24 and 28 weeks gestation.

As more and more infant CPAPs and neo natal units were used the limit of viability ( where 50 percent of premies will survive even though major disabilities remain high ) was lowed from about 28 weeks to 24 weeks gestation.

Today the limit of viability is 24 weeks gestation and has remained there for the last 12 years.

The youngest premies to ever survive were 21 weeks 5 days or 6 days.
They were considered medical miracles.

Experts agree it is highly unlikely any premie under 21 weeks will ever survive since their lungs and digestive systems are not developed enough.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Re: "It's my body"

Says you. Hey can anyone abort a fetus or does it have to be a DR? Also how is it the vast majority of Drs will not perform abortions.

I am not aware of any charges if you do one on yourself, but if someone else did one on you, yes, they'd be charged with practicing medicine without a license. But that's no different than if a layperson did a root canal and got charged. It's not unique to abortion.

Actually, there are more doctors willing to do abortions than there are clinics (due to draconian laws forcing them to close). But the reasons some places are without access are complex.

First of all, being an abortion doctor subjects you to the risk of injury, vandalism, and in rare cases death by anti-choicers. You have to be a rather brave person to do it in some parts of this country, and due to a combination of prohibitive laws and the danger in places with especially high risk of anti-choice terrorism, there aren't many clinics to begin with.

They are expensive to build, due to the need for extreme, fortress-like security. They are hard to keep open, due to the onslaught of anti-woman laws in some states. Some clinics have resorted to flying in doctors, partly because local doctors live in fear, and partly because they want to keep their own safe. This is the case in both Dakotas. The doctor who serves in South Dakota actually came out of retirement to give these women access to abortion.

There are also hundreds of specialties within medicine, and at least a dozen within gynecology alone, so it stands to reason only a minority practice abortion. There's only a minority of doctors who specialize in ovarian cancer, but that doesn't mean most doctors think women with ovarian cancer are evil. Frankly, with all the risks and job insecurity involved, it's amazing that anyone is willing to do it at all, especially since they don't really make that much.

But not only are doctors willing to do it, but we have more willing doctors than we do access.

 

[choiceone]

Re: "It's my body"

I am not aware of any charges if you do one on yourself, but if someone else did one on you, yes, they'd be charged with practicing medicine without a license. But that's no different than if a layperson did a root canal and got charged. It's not unique to abortion.

Actually, there are more doctors willing to do abortions than there are clinics (due to draconian laws forcing them to close). But the reasons some places are without access are complex.

First of all, being an abortion doctor subjects you to the risk of injury, vandalism, and in rare cases death by anti-choicers. You have to be a rather brave person to do it in some parts of this country, and due to a combination of prohibitive laws and the danger in places with especially high risk of anti-choice terrorism, there aren't many clinics to begin with.

They are expensive to build, due to the need for extreme, fortress-like security. They are hard to keep open, due to the onslaught of anti-woman laws in some states. Some clinics have resorted to flying in doctors, partly because local doctors live in fear, and partly because they want to keep their own safe. This is the case in both Dakotas. The doctor who serves in South Dakota actually came out of retirement to give these women access to abortion.

There are also hundreds of specialties within medicine, and at least a dozen within gynecology alone, so it stands to reason only a minority practice abortion. There's only a minority of doctors who specialize in ovarian cancer, but that doesn't mean most doctors think women with ovarian cancer are evil. Frankly, with all the risks and job insecurity involved, it's amazing that anyone is willing to do it at all, especially since they don't really make that much.

But not only are doctors willing to do it, but we have more willing doctors than we do access.

On self-induced abortion as a crime in the US, see the section on the United States in this wiki:
Self-induced abortion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The practice of self-induced abortion by various means has long been recorded in the United States. Turn-of-the-20th-century birth control advocate Margaret Sanger wrote in her autobiography of a 1912 incident in which she was summoned to treat a woman who had nearly died from such an attempt.[13]
A study concluded in 1968[14] determined that over 500,000 illegal abortions were performed every year in the United States, a portion of which were performed by women acting alone. The study suggested that the number of women dying as a result of self-induced abortions exceeded those resulting from abortions performed by another person. A 1979 study noted that many women who required hospitalization following self-induced abortion attempts were admitted under the pretext of having had a miscarriage or spontaneous abortion.[15]
Although Roe v. Wade[16] made abortion more readily available throughout the U.S., it remains a crime in most jurisdictions for a woman to attempt to perform an abortion on herself. In May 2005, Gabriela Flores - a poor 22-year-old Mexican immigrant farm worker and mother of three living in Pelion, South Carolina - was charged under such a statute, which carried a maximum penalty of two years in prison. She had induced abortion at roughly 16 weeks by ingesting misoprostol under the brand name Cytotec, an ulcer medication with abortifacient potential.[17] She was sentenced to 90 days in jail. In January 2007, Amber Abreu, an 18-year-old Dominican immigrant living in Lawrence, Massachusetts, also took misoprostol (Cytotec) to induce an abortion. She subsequently gave birth to a premature baby girl, named Ashley, who died at a hospital four days later. It was believed Abreu was between 23 and 25 weeks pregnant when she aborted. Abortion is illegal in Massachusetts after 24 weeks. In addition to the self-induced abortion charge, Abreu faced murder charges if it was found she was beyond 24 weeks pregnant when she took the medication. Eventually, all charges against her were dropped. In April 2007, Katrina L. Pierce, at 24-year-old woman from West Monroe, New York, was arrested by Oswego police and charged with second-degree self abortion. She had ingested 30 Tylenol and 5 800-milligram Motrins in an attempt to abort her 13 week pregnancy. In March 1994, Kawana Michele Ashley, a 19-year-old unemployed mother of a 3-year-old son from St. Petersburg, Florida, put a pillow over her abdomen and shot herself with a .22-caliber pistol, injuring the unborn 6-month-old fetus. An emergency Caesarean section was performed and a baby girl, named Brittany, was delivered. She died two weeks later. The Florida Supreme Court cleared Ashley three years later. In February 2006, Tammy Wynette Skinner, a 22-year-old mother of two from Suffolk, Virginia, shot herself in the abdomen and killed the full-term fetus that was about to be born. She had initially said a man had shot her but later admitted to doing it herself. Abortions are illegal in Virginia after the third trimester, but charges against her were dropped. In April 2009, Fang Chi Xue, a 38-year-old Chinese immigrant from Quincy, Massachusetts, stabbed herself multiple times in the abdomen and killed the unborn male fetus. She also murdered her 9-year-old daughter and attempted to murder her 14-year-old daughter. Mississippi classifies self-induced abortions as deaths which affect the public interest, requiring that physicians report them to the local medical examiner. By contrast, New Mexico's "Unborn Victims of Violence Act" exempts self-induced abortion from the criminal liability the act creates.

Note that some of the problems involved in these cases concern doing later abortions or using the wrong stuff. If the women who used misoprostol had done so within the first 8 weeks, they would probably have succeeded in inducing abortion and just been very sick for a while.

 

[sayak]

Here is the original argument for autonomy from Judith Thomson with my own additions to avoid the "consensual sex is consent" charge

I am REFUTING the charge that the consensual act of sex is a de-facto tacit consent. This charge is frequently made against Judith Thomson's original argument of getting kidnapped and hooked to a terminally ill patient thought experiment (the famous violinist argument). Here's the argument in full:-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Violinist (from wikipedia)
In "A Defense of Abortion", Thomson grants for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, but defends the permissibility of abortion by appeal to a thought experiment:
You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.[4]
Thomson takes it that you may now permissibly unplug yourself from the violinist even though this will cause his death: the right to life, Thomson says, does not entail the right to use another person's body, and so by unplugging the violinist you do not violate his right to life but merely deprive him of something—the use of your body—to which he has no right. "f you do allow him to go on using your kidneys, this is a kindness on your part, and not something he can claim from you as his due."[5]
For the same reason, Thomson says, abortion does not violate the fetus's right to life but merely deprives the fetus of something—the use of the pregnant woman's body—to which it has no right. Thus, it is not that by terminating her pregnancy a woman violates her moral obligations, but rather that a woman who carries the fetus to term is a 'Good Samaritan' who goes beyond her obligations,[6] thus declaring the statement to "love thy neighbour like thyself" not to be a moral obligation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A common objection to this is consensual sex violets the premise of "forced use of body to sustain life" premise of the argument.
The basic follow-up is that the woman has not caused harm by the act of conception. It is an altruist side-consequence of sex. And unlike a case when one may be asked for reparations to damages caused by actions, one cannot ask somebody to continue an altruistic project against one's will. I wrote a simple thought experiment to make this clear
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suppose you buy a car and it says in the company receipt that part of the sales proceeds would go towards maintaining a life-saving hospital running in a destitute village. Fine. Now a month later the hospital writes to you saying that because of your donation through that purchase a very sick child have been able to afford life-saving treatment for the past month. But now the money is running out, and since no other donor has been located, you, being the first donor is legally responsible for continuing to provide money till alternative arrangements to save the child's life are made. How ridiculous of a demand is that??
Then I propose that the situation would be even more ridiculous if one is asked to share not money but body space, blood, nutrients etc. Thus the bodily autonomy argument is made immune to implicit consent by consensual sex objection.
---------------------------------------THE END--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Dakka3]

I wounder what you would you tell me about the matter if your mother HAD chosen to abort YOU.

I seriously doubt that you would tell me that you would have done that to your children if you could magicaly become alive again.

Basically, I doubt you would EVER support or have a abortion yourself had you known what its like for the fetus.

Also, while kids may be a big pain in the butt to some people mostly women children are one of the BEST things that ever happened to them.

E.g. a teacher in my bible class told us a story of when she had one of her sons.
When she learned of her baby's disorder she was devistated to the highest degree. she told us of how her son had been hard to raise that child and the pain she endured. But as she says today it was all worth it now.

 

[sayak]

I wounder what you would you tell me about the matter if your mother HAD chosen to abort YOU.

I would be devastated if I knew she wanted to abort me but could not because of some stupid law and would try my utmost to repeal that law so that no mother would have to be forced to have a child in future.

Basically, I doubt you would EVER support or have a abortion yourself had you known what its like for the fetus.

There's nothing like being a fetus before 26 weeks at least. There's nobody there for your example to apply.

It upto the women to decide what she wants in her life and when. Sorry, but if you have actual arguments to make for your case do so, as I have. I do not really care about what your emotions and opinions are about this matter. You can act privately according to whatever your inclinations may be, but you have ZERO right to thrust it on any body else without a reasoned justification for your case.