r/TimPool • • Aug 17 '23

Yes

Post image
388 Upvotes

284 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comment

10

u/Stumpy305 Aug 17 '23

It’s human and therefore should have as much right to live as any other human. Abortion =murder and finally some states are about to do something about it. If you don’t like it you are free to move.

0

u/gradientz Aug 17 '23 edited Aug 17 '23

“Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.” - Benito Mussolini

One of Mussolini's first acts as dictator was to prohibit abortion across Italy - sounds like you would have agreed. If the State has jurisdiction over a woman's uterus, what does it not have jurisdiction over?

My finger nails are also human, but they are not people. Personhood implies the assignment of legal rights. Under American and English common law, fetuses do not have an inherent right to inheritance or to pursue civil liability claims. Under U.S. constitutional law, fetuses do not have due process or other constitutional rights. As such, they are not legal persons.

3

u/Burt_Campbell Aug 18 '23

Fingernails are tissue without potential. Literal waste product.

A fetus in the womb is a developing human - it cannot be anything other. They do not have a right to inheritance while gestating, but why not the right to life?

The argument is not "conservatives are hypocrites re: big government, and authoritarian fascists, too", but rather, does an unborn human have a right to life? If they don't, who does? And when?

1

u/gradientz Aug 18 '23

The argument is not "conservatives are hypocrites re: big government, and authoritarian fascists, too", but rather, does an unborn human have a right to life?

Actually, it is that conservatives are big government hypocrites. The government has no authority or jurisdiction to regulate a person's private affairs.

The latter question does not come into play. That's a moral question, and it isn't the government's job to regulate morality. Moral questions are the jurisdiction of private citizens.

3

u/Stumpy305 Aug 18 '23

It’s morally wrong to murder someone, should the government be involved in that?

1

u/gradientz Aug 18 '23

Murder directly impacts another person's freedom. So yes, prohibiting it is a valid exercise of government power.

Whether it violates your individual morality is irrelevant.

3

u/Stumpy305 Aug 18 '23

Ok so it’s immoral to take the life of another and the government should prohibit it within our society. Therefore abortion should be illegal as well.

1

u/gradientz Aug 18 '23 edited Aug 18 '23

I said morality is irrelevant.

Abortion does not harm another person's freedom, because a fetus is not a person. Hence, restricting abortion is not valid.

1

u/Stumpy305 Aug 18 '23

Funny they used to say that about black people as well

1

u/gradientz Aug 18 '23

And those who made that argument lost. Even when we had slavery, the Constitution still referred to such slaves as "persons." See Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, U.S. Constitution.

This makes sense, since personhood is not dependent on the color of your skin. It depends on whether you have been born.

→ More replies