3 ms·

Well, now you're just confusing positive and negative rights. The curtailment of agency that we have a long history of is to enforce negative rights (I.e you do

Well, now you're just confusing positive and negative rights. The curtailment of agency that we have a long history of is to enforce negative rights (I.e you do not have the right to kill someone) or to protect you from yourself if there is strong evidence you are not of sound mind (i.e. inpatient psychiatric care and that is really a negative right as well because we are stopping the crazy person in front of us from harming the potentially sane person underneath that has been overcome by crazy). Your examples are all of the form this person has X problem therefore I can be compelled to do Y, which is pretty clearly not allowed when you read the constitution. In the case of an abortion the right to autonomy clashes with the right to not be murdered. And that is what has had a significant portion of the population so up in arms that they spent fifty years trying to get a supreme court that would overturn Roe because they correctly think that point is before birth. How much before birth is what needs to go through the sometimes ugly but often cathartic democratic process at the state level.

nobody9999 4y ago
>Your examples are all of the form this person has X problem therefore I can be compelled to do Y, which is pretty clearly not allowed when you read the constitution. Right. This (non)person (an embryo/fetus) has the problem that it cannot exist outside the womb for at least six months, therefore a woman can be compelled to literally give up her flesh and body for nine months -- against her will? So. By your logic, if a person will die without your help, even if you don't know/like/want them around and you don't help them, you're a murderer. That's what you seem to be claiming. Does it sound absurd? It should, because it is. And that's what you're advocating.
- snapplebobapple 4y ago
  No, I specifically said we need to go through the sometimes ugly but often cathartic legislative process to decide at what point before birth an abortion is a medical procedure and at what point it becomes a murder. Also, talking about at what point a fetus can survive outside the womb is a non winning argument as well because it's shockingly early and getting earlier every year due to medical breakthroughs. You and I both won't like where the legal limit on abortion ends up by that metric. No, you are a murderer if you choose to kill someone and act on your choice. You keep trying to put words in my mouth that I did not say because you have talking points for those words whereas you don't seem to have talking points for what I actually said. Also I am really not sure if you have any comprehension or experience of the actual pregnancy process because you keep couching it in terms of you actively helping someone when that really isn't the case (you get better results if the mother is helping but it isn't required). As long as you keep doing the basic things that were keeping you alive before pregnancy 9 months later it is highly likely a kid will be born, especially as the pregnancy progresses further along into the later months where most people have the most problem with abortion. The active choice in a pregnancy is to terminate it or not, the rest of it can be surprisingly passive and still work (although if you choose to not terminate it and also choose to be passive you are a terrible person, which is unfortunate but not illegal).
  - nobody9999 4y ago
    >No, I specifically said we need to go through the sometimes ugly but often cathartic legislative process to decide at what point before birth an abortion is a medical procedure and at what point it becomes a murder. And I disagree. What other people do witht their bodies is none of your (or anyone else's) business. Anything else is just being a a busybody. Edit: To clarify, bodily autonomy is an individual right which shouldn't be limited or proscribed by any government, local, state or federal.

nobody9999 4y ago

>Your examples are all of the form this person has X problem therefore I can be compelled to do Y, which is pretty clearly not allowed when you read the constitution. Right. This (non)person (an embryo/fetus) has the problem that it cannot exist outside the womb for at least six months, therefore a woman can be compelled to literally give up her flesh and body for nine months -- against her will? So. By your logic, if a person will die without your help, even if you don't know/like/want them around and you don't help them, you're a murderer. That's what you seem to be claiming. Does it sound absurd? It should, because it is. And that's what you're advocating.

snapplebobapple 4y ago
No, I specifically said we need to go through the sometimes ugly but often cathartic legislative process to decide at what point before birth an abortion is a medical procedure and at what point it becomes a murder. Also, talking about at what point a fetus can survive outside the womb is a non winning argument as well because it's shockingly early and getting earlier every year due to medical breakthroughs. You and I both won't like where the legal limit on abortion ends up by that metric. No, you are a murderer if you choose to kill someone and act on your choice. You keep trying to put words in my mouth that I did not say because you have talking points for those words whereas you don't seem to have talking points for what I actually said. Also I am really not sure if you have any comprehension or experience of the actual pregnancy process because you keep couching it in terms of you actively helping someone when that really isn't the case (you get better results if the mother is helping but it isn't required). As long as you keep doing the basic things that were keeping you alive before pregnancy 9 months later it is highly likely a kid will be born, especially as the pregnancy progresses further along into the later months where most people have the most problem with abortion. The active choice in a pregnancy is to terminate it or not, the rest of it can be surprisingly passive and still work (although if you choose to not terminate it and also choose to be passive you are a terrible person, which is unfortunate but not illegal).
- nobody9999 4y ago
  >No, I specifically said we need to go through the sometimes ugly but often cathartic legislative process to decide at what point before birth an abortion is a medical procedure and at what point it becomes a murder. And I disagree. What other people do witht their bodies is none of your (or anyone else's) business. Anything else is just being a a busybody. Edit: To clarify, bodily autonomy is an individual right which shouldn't be limited or proscribed by any government, local, state or federal.