3 ms·

That depends on what your "it" is, and I agree here that framing is really key. Consider the difference between your formulation: > should the government be a

That depends on what your "it" is, and I agree here that framing is really key. Consider the difference between your formulation: > should the government be able to force you at gunpoint/threat of imprisonment to carry a fetus for 9 months? and: When should the government be able to force you at gunpoint/threat of imprisonment to carry a fetus for 9 months? You can take my version and reduce it to yours with "always" and "never" responses, but the world is not digital, it is analog. My question allows for a lot more answers, a lot more debate, and compassion for one another. A binary response leads only to argumentation because we can't find the edges that we agree on, only the boundary we fight over.

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
well said, this is what I was getting at when I said the ideas matter more than the words.
dpkirchner 3y ago
> When should the government be able to force you at gunpoint/threat of imprisonment to carry a fetus for 9 months? If you get to the point where you're asking "when", you're already saying the government should be able to force you to carry a fetus. I'm not sure how else to interpret it. If it helps I guess you can twist my formulation to be "the government should be able to force you to carry a fetus under some circumstances that are evaluated by people on a case-by-case basis". All that "under" and beyond stuff is redundant, however. As soon as we say that a case requires evaluation we apply force. We coerce the person by threatening them with imprisonment if they don't stop seeking an abortion. Further, we open the door to imprisoning people in a system that is already slow and burdensome; we then give people in government power to wait 9 months for the question to become moot. > A binary response leads only to argumentation because we can't find the edges that we agree on, only the boundary we fight over. The debate is not nor has it ever been over circumstances or conditions -- that is a distraction from the pro-life crowd. For example, some propose exceptions for cases of rape. But can rape be proven in less than 9 months, including appeals? Obviously not. If an allegation or mere statement that a rape occurred is enough then we might as well not issue the threat. Others propose exceptions if the pregnancy threatens the pregnant person, which just means that some cases will be decided by the government, ultimately. The boundary is well-defined and fixed. You may just be uncomfortable with it, and that's your choice.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
  > We coerce the person by threatening them with imprisonment if they don't stop seeking an abortion. citation needed. I've heard of fines, I've heard of public shaming, I have not heard of imprisonment for attempting to get an abortion. Most of the force you're discussing is against doctors rather than women.
  - dpkirchner 3y ago
    You left out some context from my comment: if we call abortion murder, then we coerce the person by... etc. FWIW, this is where we're at today, in the UK: https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/12/uk/woman-jailed-abortion-pill-intl-gbr/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/12/uk/woman-jailed-abortion-pill... > A British woman who used medication to induce an abortion after the United Kingdom’s legally allowed limit has been sentenced to prison for 28 months, the PA Media news agency reported. And in the US: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/10/17/alabama-pregnant-birth-jail-etowah-county-lawsuit/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/10/17/alabama-pre... > Like Caswell, many of the women at the Etowah County Detention Center are detained under chemical endangerment of a child charges for alleged drug use during pregnancy, according to the lawsuit. Alabama passed the statute in 2006 to target people who put children at risk by converting their homes into methamphetamine labs, The Post previously reported. But the law has been increasingly applied to cases of fetal endangerment — a byproduct of Alabama’s 2018 personhood constitutional amendment that ensures “the protection of the rights of the unborn child.” and https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/alabama-case-over-mistaken-pregnancy-highlights-risks-post-roe-world-2022-12-01/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/alabama-case-over-m... > [O]fficials in Shelby County, Alabama, more than seven years ago brought and later dismissed chemical endangerment charges against a woman who [...] wasn't pregnant, AL.com reported in June 2015. And, in 2019, an Alabama grand jury indicted a woman who lost her unborn baby when she was shot, after declining to charge the shooter because it found she had fired in self-defense. We're close, if not already there. It's a really bad time to be pregnant in some states.
    - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
      I'm not even going to bother refuting this, that's how confident I am that your bullshit is transparent to everyone. "someone had a stiffer sentence for doing drugs while pregnant ... that's like imprisonment for abortion maaaaaaan!".

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago

well said, this is what I was getting at when I said the ideas matter more than the words.

dpkirchner 3y ago

> When should the government be able to force you at gunpoint/threat of imprisonment to carry a fetus for 9 months? If you get to the point where you're asking "when", you're already saying the government should be able to force you to carry a fetus. I'm not sure how else to interpret it. If it helps I guess you can twist my formulation to be "the government should be able to force you to carry a fetus under some circumstances that are evaluated by people on a case-by-case basis". All that "under" and beyond stuff is redundant, however. As soon as we say that a case requires evaluation we apply force. We coerce the person by threatening them with imprisonment if they don't stop seeking an abortion. Further, we open the door to imprisoning people in a system that is already slow and burdensome; we then give people in government power to wait 9 months for the question to become moot. > A binary response leads only to argumentation because we can't find the edges that we agree on, only the boundary we fight over. The debate is not nor has it ever been over circumstances or conditions -- that is a distraction from the pro-life crowd. For example, some propose exceptions for cases of rape. But can rape be proven in less than 9 months, including appeals? Obviously not. If an allegation or mere statement that a rape occurred is enough then we might as well not issue the threat. Others propose exceptions if the pregnancy threatens the pregnant person, which just means that some cases will be decided by the government, ultimately. The boundary is well-defined and fixed. You may just be uncomfortable with it, and that's your choice.

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
> We coerce the person by threatening them with imprisonment if they don't stop seeking an abortion. citation needed. I've heard of fines, I've heard of public shaming, I have not heard of imprisonment for attempting to get an abortion. Most of the force you're discussing is against doctors rather than women.
- dpkirchner 3y ago
  You left out some context from my comment: if we call abortion murder, then we coerce the person by... etc. FWIW, this is where we're at today, in the UK: https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/12/uk/woman-jailed-abortion-pill-intl-gbr/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/12/uk/woman-jailed-abortion-pill... > A British woman who used medication to induce an abortion after the United Kingdom’s legally allowed limit has been sentenced to prison for 28 months, the PA Media news agency reported. And in the US: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/10/17/alabama-pregnant-birth-jail-etowah-county-lawsuit/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/10/17/alabama-pre... > Like Caswell, many of the women at the Etowah County Detention Center are detained under chemical endangerment of a child charges for alleged drug use during pregnancy, according to the lawsuit. Alabama passed the statute in 2006 to target people who put children at risk by converting their homes into methamphetamine labs, The Post previously reported. But the law has been increasingly applied to cases of fetal endangerment — a byproduct of Alabama’s 2018 personhood constitutional amendment that ensures “the protection of the rights of the unborn child.” and https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/alabama-case-over-mistaken-pregnancy-highlights-risks-post-roe-world-2022-12-01/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/alabama-case-over-m... > [O]fficials in Shelby County, Alabama, more than seven years ago brought and later dismissed chemical endangerment charges against a woman who [...] wasn't pregnant, AL.com reported in June 2015. And, in 2019, an Alabama grand jury indicted a woman who lost her unborn baby when she was shot, after declining to charge the shooter because it found she had fired in self-defense. We're close, if not already there. It's a really bad time to be pregnant in some states.
  - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
    I'm not even going to bother refuting this, that's how confident I am that your bullshit is transparent to everyone. "someone had a stiffer sentence for doing drugs while pregnant ... that's like imprisonment for abortion maaaaaaan!".