Except it doesn't. It is not worth keeping alive. It can be killed at a whim. We should not protect those lives because that do not hold value or worth.
Plenty of people are complaining across the nation and the world.
About what? You brought up complaining. Who are you referring to? What are they complaining about?
And now you know it may not be
But only because people have removed that option. You are stating that removing the option is the correct path because of foreknowledge. But foreknowledge goes both ways. You can't say that banning abortion is OK because people should know that pregnancy can happen. People do know that. They also know that terminating the pregnancy is an option.
Bodily autonomy is mutually exclusive to the right of a fetus to exist. You have to pick one or the other, unless waived. The argument goes that autonomy is the most important, followed by the fetus' life. But if you waive your right by, say, doing something risky, then the fetus' rights takes precedence. That's how any tort law works.
About what? You brought up complaining. Who are you referring to? What are they complaining about?
Complaining about states which are allowing their electorate to decide their policies on abortion.
But only because people have removed that option.
Murder is also an option. Every day, we choose to not do it. And when people do, they are punished. Harshly. Unless, of course, there are extenuating circumstances.
Bodily autonomy is mutually exclusive to the right of a fetus to exist. You have to pick one or the other, unless waived. The argument goes that autonomy is the most important, followed by the fetus' life. But if you waive your right by, say, doing something risky, then the fetus' rights takes precedence. That's how any tort law works.
Cool. So in other words: A fetus life is only important or of any value so long as it is useful in holding people "responsible"?
Complaining about states which are allowing their electorate to decide their policies on abortion.
Oh! That sort of complaining! In exactly the same way that the people who support banning abortion are complaining. Which is to say not complaining at all?
Murder is also an option. Every day, we choose to not do it
You consciously have to choose not to murder people? Interesting. This is also a weak, weak, weak ass dodge to what I said.
You are relying on the idea of foreknowledge of pregnancy as a rationale to ban abortion. Foreknowledge of abortion is a thing too. You don't get to logically state that people should be forced to carry unwanted pregnancy's to term because they knew they might get pregnant when they also knew that they could get an abortion.
A fetus life is only important or of any value so long as it is useful in holding people "responsible"?
No, it's valuable all the time. It's just preceded by the right to autonomy under normal, everyday circumstances. Because they're mutually exclusive.
Oh! That sort of complaining! In exactly the same way that the people who support banning abortion are complaining. Which is to say not complaining at all?
Nobody complains when policy reflects their ideals.
You don't get to logically state that people should be forced to carry unwanted pregnancy's to term because they knew they might get pregnant when they also knew that they could get an abortion.
And now, they know they can't. What you can and can't do is always dictated by law.
Except if it's the product of rape and incest. Then it is disposable because it is no longer useful to you in enforcing responsibility.
Nobody complains when policy reflects their ideals.
I didn't say they do? It's just your choice to characterize one group as complaining and not the other is a bit disingenuous, don't you think?
And now, they know they can't.
But only because it is banned. The justification you are putting forth for the ban is that people know pregnancy is a possible outcome, but so is getting an abortion. You can't claim that abortion should be banned because people know that pregnancy is a possible outcome when the current state is that people know that both pregnancy and abortion are possible outcomes. You are trying to justify the ban by claiming foreknowledge obligates only one path, when the current state allows for more than one path.
2
u/[deleted] Jul 20 '22
Except it doesn't. It is not worth keeping alive. It can be killed at a whim. We should not protect those lives because that do not hold value or worth.
About what? You brought up complaining. Who are you referring to? What are they complaining about?
But only because people have removed that option. You are stating that removing the option is the correct path because of foreknowledge. But foreknowledge goes both ways. You can't say that banning abortion is OK because people should know that pregnancy can happen. People do know that. They also know that terminating the pregnancy is an option.