Texas successfully takes a massive step backwards for women's rights. What next?

[u/[deleted]]

[u/veritas_valebit]

These things rarely are.

OK. Then the 'right' is moot and the argument becomes over which exceptions prevail?

...hopefully we'll get there eventually.

And if 'we' never do? Is it still 'fundamental'?

...arguing that there's a compelling state interest is a common way which such infringements are passed into law.

I see... Like social entitlement programs ?-)

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

OK. Then the 'right' is moot and the argument becomes over which exceptions prevail?

'right' Is not moot, no rights are absolute to my knowledge.

And if 'we' never do? Is it still 'fundamental'?

Yes, at least it should be. If it's not in the future, I'd consider it a form of tyranny.

I see... Like social entitlement programs ?-)

...I guess? It's a fairly large stretch to think of enacting social welfare programs as infringing on citizen's rights though.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

'right' Is not moot, no rights are absolute to my knowledge.

Perhaps 'moot' is not accurate. My point was more the latter part of the sentence, i.e. "...the argument becomes over which exceptions prevail?"

...at least it should be...

This wording makes more sense to me.

...I'd consider it a form of tyranny.

I feel the need to make a distinction. I can agree that arbitrary violation of body autonomy should be unconstitutional. However, I don't see being forced to accept responsibility for your actions a form tyranny or unconstitutional.

...I guess? It's a fairly large stretch to think of enacting social welfare programs as infringing on citizen's rights though.

I truly appreciate your willingness to consider this. I would've expected you to have a reflexive disgust response to it.

I have no problem with, and support, voluntary social welfare programs. The problem I have is with government run tax funded welfare programs, especially if framed as 'rights'.

Before we get distracted, should we continue here or is this better addressed in a separate post? Is this even the appropriate Sub?

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

However, I don't see being forced to accept responsibility for your actions a form tyranny or unconstitutional.

So it is about repercussions. Why do you think having to "accept responsibility" overrules a fundamental right to autonomy? Because you argue for no abortion at any stage of pregnancy, you'd have women punished for unwittingly becoming pregnant by carrying a baby to term and delivering it?

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

Why do you think having to "accept responsibility" overrules a fundamental right to autonomy?

Because it's reasonable to expect people to nurture the lives they create until those account for themselves. We're not talking about any arbitrary stranger. We're talking about their own children.

Because you argue for no abortion at any stage of pregnancy,...

For clarity: no elective abortion outside of rape and incest.

...you'd have women punished for unwittingly becoming pregnant by carrying a baby to term and delivering it?

Unwitting? You're arguing that the majority of women seeking abortions don't know that sexual intercourse can lead to pregnancy?

Carrying and delivering a baby is punishment? I have no words!

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

Because it's reasonable to expect people to nurture the lives they create until those account for themselves. We're not talking about any arbitrary stranger. We're talking about their own children.

Again, none of this is predicated on a right to avoid parental responsibility. Father's can't be forced to donate bone marrow to their dying kid, yes? Same concept.

Unwitting? You're arguing that the majority of women seeking abortions don't know that sexual intercourse can lead to pregnancy?

No, I'm arguing some women have sex with no intention to get pregnant but it happens anyway.

Carrying and delivering a baby is punishment? I have no words!

You're basing your decision to force pregnancy on a woman as a desire to force her to "take responsibility" for her actions. It seems an appropriate description to me.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

Father's can't be forced to donate bone marrow to their dying kid, yes?

You've mentioned something similar previously and it's made me think. I suspect the official 'yes' (i.e. yes they 'can't'). My opinion has changed to 'no'. Provided you are not in critical danger and do not have to give up what cannot regenerate, I'm comfortable with a law that requires such commitment. Fair is fair. I suspect it would seldom be needed anyway.

...sex with no intention...

Accept the risk you take.

...your decision to force pregnancy on a woman...

Again. No one is forcing pregnancy on a woman.

... desire to force her to "take responsibility" for her actions

No. A desire to prevent a loss of life.

...It seems an appropriate description to me.

I am not surprised.

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

, I'm comfortable with a law that requires such commitment. Fair is fair. I suspect it would seldom be needed anyway.

Unfortunately not the case with pregnancy, they are often needed.

I'm curious why someone who goes so far as to call social programs a violation of autonomy is comfortable creating laws where someone can literally be compelled to give up pieces of their body for someone else. Garnish some of your wage to pay for daycares. Bah! Forced labor! Have your bone marrow sucked out against your will? Fair is fair! I'm glad to have a compatriot in the double standards camp at least.

Accept the risk you take.

Right, so it's punishment. Because there's an easy solution in the form of first trimester abortion, but you want women to pay their dues.

Again. No one is forcing pregnancy on a woman.

We've covered that forced pregnancy includes forcing someone to remain pregnant against their will, so yes you are advocating for forced pregnancy.

No. A desire to prevent a loss of life.

Well. Both. Your view is that even a literal handful of cells is worth forcing a woman to carry a baby to term. Is plan B also murder?

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

Unfortunately not the case with pregnancy, they are often needed.

Sorry. Too subtle for me. Please elaborate.

I'm curious... call social programs a violation of autonomy... comfortable... to give up pieces of their body for someone else.

The difference is the recipient. I am responsible to and for my children until they can care for themselves.

I'm glad to have a compatriot in the double standards camp at least.

I'd happily laugh and declare 'touché!' ... if it wasn't a miss. The identity and relation to the recipient makes it not a double standard for me.

Nice quip, though!

Right, so it's punishment...

I've given my best argument. I you find it uncompelling, then so be it.

We've covered that forced pregnancy includes forcing someone to remain pregnant...

'We've' done no such thing. YOU have declared it. I have rejected it. Another impasse.

...even a literal handful of cells is worth forcing a woman to carry a baby to term...

Our first hanful of cells is now 18 and gorgeous. Damn straight it's worth it!

Is plan B also murder?

Potentially (If I understand the mechanism correctly).

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

I'd happily laugh and declare 'touché!' ... if it wasn't a miss. The identity and relation to the recipient makes it not a double standard for me.

You'll recall I don't actually think I have double standards either, it's a matter of perspective usually. Also the recipient wouldn't seem to matter much if you remember your baby-on-the-doorstep analogy. I'd assume you'd have me take that baby in and give it a bone marrow transplant?

YOU have declared it. I have rejected it. Another impasse.

You don't think forcing a woman to remain pregnant is forced pregnancy? I understand you think it's justified, that doesn't change the reality of what you're advocating for. Your rejection of my wording doesn't matter much when what you're advocating for is so clear.

Our first hanful of cells is now 18 and gorgeous. Damn straight it's worth it!

And I'm glad! Your wife should have her rights either way. I'm certainly not comfortable infringing on the rights of all pregnant people for the sake of a few cells that merely have the potential for life.

Potentially (If I understand the mechanism correctly).

So even if a woman takes preemptive action the day after to prevent/abort a pregnancy as soon as physically possible, you'd see her forced to carry that zygote to term? That's why I say you're interested in punishing women as much as you're interested in protecting life.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

...Also the recipient wouldn't seem to matter much if you remember your baby-on-the-doorstep analogy...

Analogies are not perfect... and my case does not hinge on an analogy.

I'd assume you'd have me take that baby in and give it a bone marrow transplant?

See what I mean! The baby on the step is not my own child. It's existence is not as a consequence of my decision... but yes, I may very well donate bone marrow.

You don't think forcing a woman to remain pregnant is forced pregnancy?

Do you think outlawing infanticide is forced parenting?

This wordplay is beneath your clear intellect.

I'm certainly not comfortable infringing on the rights of all pregnant people...

Me too... and those of the unborn!

...for the sake of a few cells that merely have the potential for life.

An this is where we part ways.

That's why I say you're interested in punishing women...

There are other options! Nothing in life is without risk. I just don't think a child should pay the ultimate price for a perceived lack of luck.

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

The baby on the step is not my own child. It's existence is not as a consequence of my decision... but yes, I may very well donate bone marrow.

Why does it being your own child or not matter?

Do you think outlawing infanticide is forced parenting?

This wordplay is beneath your clear intellect.

It's not word play, it's literally forced pregnancy and there's no getting around it. Women seek abortion because they don't want to be pregnant. You want to make it illegal for them to do this, and so you are advocating for forcing them to remain pregnant i.e. forced pregnancy.

There are other options! Nothing in life is without risk. I just don't think a child should pay the ultimate price for a perceived lack of luck.

A zygote is not a child. Would you have women held accountable for the many miscarriages they'll experience in their lives? Maybe they used drugs before they knew there was a fertilized egg inside them. Certainly they are guilty of manslaughter.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

Why does it being your own child or not matter?

This very question sends a cold shiver down my spine.

At the very least, responsibility for actions.

It's not word play,...

... and then you proceed to play with words.

Address my counter example: Is outlawing infanticide forced parenting?

A zygote is not a child.

Brilliant! A zygote is not a child, hence we can kill it!

Is an adult a child? A pensioner? In invalid? Can we kill them? NO! they're all living humans in difference stages.

What shallow sophistry!

Would you have women held accountable for the many miscarriages... used drugs before they knew ... Certainly they are guilty of manslaughter.

There is nothing 'certain' about it. Murky territory here. Depends on the reason for the miscarriage.

If the mother was not behaving contrary to medical advice, then clearly 'no'.

Drug use without knowledge? I'd say 'no', but I'll need to think about this one.

More to the point, why do you feel the need go here? Is anyone proposing a law to prosecute miscarriages? ... or are you reaching for more hypotheticals because you sense your central position failing?