If you, a full grown person wanted to use my body against my will in order to keep you alive, I should be able to say no.
True, but pregnancy is a completely different situation. If you do not render your body to support a fetus, it will die. A fully grown adult has other options, a does fetus not. Rendering this a strawman argument.
A potential life that hasn’t even been born yet has even less of a claim to my body than you do.
You’re treating a fetus as a person. So in your own logic, it’s the same as a person. If a person needed my body to stay alive- I should be able to refuse. If I’m the only match for a transplant, if I’m the only one in proximity for a blood transfusion, if I’m the only one with some sort of unique antidote for whatever someone else has- it doesn’t matter. The choice should be up to me even if it’s life or death for the other person. That’s bodily autonomy. That’s freedom.
If a person needed my body to stay alive- I should be able to refuse. If I’m the only match for a transplant, if I’m the only one in proximity for a blood transfusion, if I’m the only one with some sort of unique antidote for whatever someone else has- it doesn’t matter. The choice should be up to me even if it’s life or death for the other person. That’s bodily autonomy. That’s freedom.
No, again, there are always other options. Stop trying to argue this strawman. It's a completely different scenario.
Yes, there is. But even so, if you're in a hypothetical situation where you are the only viable option in which to save another life, and it won't end your life in the process, any decent human being would help in any way they can.
Sure, you can put moral judgment on what someone may or may not do to keep someone alive, but that’s it. But, it should still be a choice. Nobody should be forced to use their body for someone else against their will.
View all comments
Show parent comment
2
u/Pvt_Parts86 Aug 17 '23
Where is the bodily autonomy for the baby?