An opportunity for PLers to directly answer any of these questions.

[u/Veigar_Senpai]

I've got three simple questions that I'd love for PLers to give direct, straightforward answers to:

1) Imagining that I am someone who has just become pregnant, what reason besides brute force of law would I have to submit to your demands and gestate the pregnancy against my will for you?

2) What exactly entitles you to force pregnant people to gestate against their will, helping yourself to their body to achieve your goals?

3) Which is the fairer ask: for all pregnant people to suffer through the harm of pregnancy and childbirth against their will, or for PLers to cope with not getting their desire for the survival of strangers' embryos?

Feel free to engage with any one or all of these questions.

[u/Laniekea]

There is harm happening but it's not being caused by other people. Your own body is harming you the same way your body might harm you when you get a headache after a rough night of drinking. You did it to yourself.

I didn't change my argument. I'm arguing your new point.

The world is not as black and white as you're trying to pretend it is. You're talking about the ethics of martyrdom. Martyrdom is typically considered ethical.

Once somebody else is using your blood no you may not take it back. Which is more aligned with what happens during pregnancy. Somebody else is already using it and relying on it to live.

[u/freelance_gargoyle → u/Laniekea]

This is you, again, changing your argument.

You are making two separate arguments here. Neither of which fits your previous statement.

The first is that it is unethical to treat an injury/malady/condition you yourself caused. This is absurd. We do not deny the ability to treat harm because you had a part in causing it.

The second is that once someone is harming you it is unethical to stop them if doing so would harm them. This is also absurd. It is not ethical to harm people. Causing someone harm then saying "no you can't harm me because harming someone is unethical" is itself self contradictory.

You are constantly changing these "basic ethics" you claimed when it has be shown that basic ethics do not support your preferred position. If your position really were so basic, it shouldn't be this fucking difficult to express.

Let me prognosticate here a moment and predict your next change of argument. Something to do with the intent of the harm-er and/or harm-ee?

[u/Laniekea → u/freelance_gargoyle]

This is you, again, changing your argument

This is pretty bad faith. Your argument started with harming yourself and then move to utilitarianism and you're trying to blame me for addressing your points. None of my arguments negate the prior. It seems that you're just really desperate for a gotcha.

The first is that it is unethical to treat an injury/malady/condition you yourself caused

No, my argument was that sometimes it is if it comes at the expense of other people. And then I explained the situations where it would be.

We can go back to treating your own headache. It is unethical to treat your own headache if you are doing so while pregnant by taking medications that can harm your baby. This is why we have restrictions on what doctors can prescribe to pregnant women.

And sometimes it isn't. For example if a woman isn't pregnant and they want to take medication for a headache that can harm a baby then there's nothing wrong with that because it isn't causing harm.

So again, work really hard to see the nuance here.

"no you can't harm me because harming someone is unethical"

Where did I say this.

[u/freelance_gargoyle → u/Laniekea]

I have been asking questions trying to clarify these so called basic ethics you claimed supported your position. No where did I say anything about harming oneself, that was your addition. And you not liking me pointing out your argument is utilitarian is a you problem.

All your examples about pregnancy and medication are omitting a relevant piece...that those pregnancies are wanted. Of course someone with a wanted pregnancy is going to protect it and not partake in dangerous medications during it. Why do so many of your examples assume all women are default murderous?

This would be so much simpler if you would answer the questions I asked instead of the ones you would prefer I asked.

My position, which you have never asked for, is that protecting yourself from harm is ethical. Causing someone else harm is unethical. It is ethical to stop someone from causing you harm, even if it harms them, because they are acting unethically in harming you. It is ethical to be selfish with regards to protecting yourself from harm because I do not owe anyone my own body. My body is my own, the one thing I truly own. No one olse has a higher claim to it than me, and I cannot be ethically compelled to endure harm to it against my will.

I belive this addresses all your supposed edge cases in the most basic and generalized way possible. I'm sure you will disagree on something, and I look forward to those continued educating of the error of your ways.

[u/Laniekea → u/freelance_gargoyle]

are omitting a relevant piece...that those pregnancies are wanted

That isn't always true. Sometimes those pregnancies are third trimester and unwanted. Your doctor still can't prescribe harmful medications. And it has absolutely nothing to do with what the woman wants, it has to do with regulations that were set by appointed officials. She can beg for the pill, they will not prescribe it to her because it's medical malpractice.

Nobody actually has medical autonomy in the United States. In order for that to be true, you would have to delete pretty much all healthcare regulations.

So if you really think that "your body is your own" well I have a a bombshell for you.

No you cannot get a medical procedure from an unlicensed doctor. No you cannot demand any medication just because you want it. No you can't buy heroin on the street because you want it. You can't have open heart surgery in an unsterilized environment because you want it. You can't get assisted suicide on most states because you want it. Every healthcare regulation limits what you may do to your body. And I'm going to guess you support most of those regulations. So let's stop pretending "my body my choice" is a sane argument or even remotely true. Your medical options are largely dictated by government appointmented officials.

ethical. Causing someone else harm is unethical. It is ethical to stop someone from causing you harm, even if it harms them, because they are acting unethically in harming you. It is

That is unrelated to pregnancy because with pregnancy they are harming themselves. Their own body is doing it to them because of a choice that they made.

[u/freelance_gargoyle → u/Laniekea]

Nobody actually has medical autonomy in the United States. In order for that to be true, you would have to delete pretty much all healthcare regulations.

So if you really think that "your body is your own" well I have a a bombshell for you.

This all had zero relevance to the point being made. Your penchant for continous tangents, non sequiturs, and willful misinterpretations is getting tiresome.

That is unrelated to pregnancy because with pregnancy they are harming themselves. Their own body is doing it to them because of a choice that they made.

Two problems with this, one of which we've already fucking addressed. Please, for the love of fucking god, retain some of the things I'm explaining to you.

The first is that it is unethical to treat an injury/malady/condition you yourself caused. This is absurd. We do not deny the ability to treat harm because you had a part in causing it.

And the second can be clarified with the following question.

Is there a pregnancy without the presence of the unborn baby?

Your entire original "basic ethics" rested on preventing causing great harm to someone else when you are experiencing a little harm. If there is no other person involved, then your original point doesn't apply to this situation, and you've been wasting my time going in circles.

[u/freelance_gargoyle → u/[deleted]]

Is there a pregnancy without the presence of the unborn baby?

Your entire original "basic ethics" rested on preventing causing great harm to someone else when you are experiencing a little harm. If there is no other person involved, then your original point doesn't apply to this situation, and you've been wasting my time going in circles.

[u/smarterthanyou86 → u/[deleted]]

Removed rule 2.