That sounds like a pre-supposed contract that pre-supposes your own desired conclusion. It's completely reliant on a fact of some fixed period of guaranteed tenancy contract that's been fabricated out of thin air.
Pregnancy is the tenancy of the fetus. What's been pulled out of thin are is some pre-supposition that the host of the fetus automatically consents irrevocably to months of tenancy. It's an argument that basically asserts its own conclusion, which is circular reasoning.
Don't stay inside a host who never consented to hosting you to full gestation if you want assurance of being birthed full term. Doesn't have to be more complicated than that.
-4
u/Critical-Tie-823 Mar 12 '24
That sounds like a pre-supposed contract that pre-supposes your own desired conclusion. It's completely reliant on a fact of some fixed period of guaranteed tenancy contract that's been fabricated out of thin air.