3 ms·

I never understood the privacy aspect. If an alien were to come down and have human biology explained and was asked about their thoughts on abortion, I doubt th

by bko 4y ago

I never understood the privacy aspect. If an alien were to come down and have human biology explained and was asked about their thoughts on abortion, I doubt they would invoke privacy. Maybe bodily autonomy, but not privacy. Perhaps I'm missing something. In regards to bodily autonomy, again if the fetus is a life, you have to be a good steward of the life. I don't think you have a (moral) right to harm your body to the detriment of the life, much like you don't have a right to drive off a cliff with someone inside your car with you. And if someone assaults you and results in you losing your baby, I don't think that's the same as a regular assault.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
brewdad 4y ago
The privacy aspect is simple. You have no right to know anything about my discussions with my doctor nor to dictate courses of action. The same people who (falsely) screamed about vaccine mandates being a HIPAA violation sure don't give a fuck about that now.
- lkjdsklf 4y ago
  The privacy argument is tenuous at best. We regulate how and what medical procedures can be performed all the time. > The same people who (falsely) screamed about vaccine mandates being a HIPAA violation sure don't give a fuck about that now. If you're going to make the argument that privacy requirements protect abortion procedures, then that would also mean that vaccine mandates are not allowed for the same reason. You can't have it both ways.
- dahfizz 4y ago
  > The privacy aspect is simple. You have no right to know anything about my discussions with my doctor nor to dictate courses of action. This is a pretty weak argument which could be used to justify any number of things. Can you rape or murder behind closed doors, and invoke the right to privacy when the authorities try to stop you? Just because X happens in private doesn't make it legal and protected by privacy rights. There are plenty of illegal medical procedures. You can't have a doctor remove a kidney and help you sell it, for example.
  - ModernMech 4y ago
    There are different levels of privacy. The government coming into your home is a much different violation of privacy than the government coming into your body.
simondw 4y ago
> Perhaps I'm missing something How is the government going to know which people have fetuses in them, and how long they've been there, without some loss of privacy? (Do you think menstrual cycles are private information, for example?) And how does the government know what people do (or plan to do) to their own bodies without some loss of privacy? > In regards to bodily autonomy, again if the fetus is a life Well yes, you can argue against bodily autonomy as a compelling argument for legalizing abortion. My initial point was that you were just ignoring it. That said... > you have to be a good steward of the life Says who? Compelling someone to use their body as a host (not "steward") of another life is a violation of their bodily autonomy. If you're going to use car analogies, we also don't say that anyone involved in a car crash must donate blood or organs to save other victims.

by bko 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

brewdad 4y ago

The privacy aspect is simple. You have no right to know anything about my discussions with my doctor nor to dictate courses of action. The same people who (falsely) screamed about vaccine mandates being a HIPAA violation sure don't give a fuck about that now.

lkjdsklf 4y ago
The privacy argument is tenuous at best. We regulate how and what medical procedures can be performed all the time. > The same people who (falsely) screamed about vaccine mandates being a HIPAA violation sure don't give a fuck about that now. If you're going to make the argument that privacy requirements protect abortion procedures, then that would also mean that vaccine mandates are not allowed for the same reason. You can't have it both ways.
dahfizz 4y ago
> The privacy aspect is simple. You have no right to know anything about my discussions with my doctor nor to dictate courses of action. This is a pretty weak argument which could be used to justify any number of things. Can you rape or murder behind closed doors, and invoke the right to privacy when the authorities try to stop you? Just because X happens in private doesn't make it legal and protected by privacy rights. There are plenty of illegal medical procedures. You can't have a doctor remove a kidney and help you sell it, for example.
- ModernMech 4y ago
  There are different levels of privacy. The government coming into your home is a much different violation of privacy than the government coming into your body.

simondw 4y ago

> Perhaps I'm missing something How is the government going to know which people have fetuses in them, and how long they've been there, without some loss of privacy? (Do you think menstrual cycles are private information, for example?) And how does the government know what people do (or plan to do) to their own bodies without some loss of privacy? > In regards to bodily autonomy, again if the fetus is a life Well yes, you can argue against bodily autonomy as a compelling argument for legalizing abortion. My initial point was that you were just ignoring it. That said... > you have to be a good steward of the life Says who? Compelling someone to use their body as a host (not "steward") of another life is a violation of their bodily autonomy. If you're going to use car analogies, we also don't say that anyone involved in a car crash must donate blood or organs to save other victims.