Abortion(do guys have a say?)

[Ookawauso]

I may agree to that statemeant if all it means is (in the reverse where i would keep you alive) me stuck in a room conected to you via some machine with a few wires, and people brought me food ect.
however, again that situation is not plausable

Whether you would agree to do it or not is irrelevent. People should not be forced into a situation whereby their body is used for another's benefit without their consent.

well ok, then you now agree that unless it was caused by rape abortion is wrong?

[Erinkita]

Whether you would agree to do it or not is irrelevent. People should not be forced into a situation whereby their body is used for another's benefit without their consent.

well ok, then you now agree that unless it was caused by rape abortion is wrong?

When did I say that?

[Dyakovo]

So you agree that violating a woman's bodily autonomy is not moral/ethical?

CONFUSING ME!
please if you really think its a good point spell it out to me.
how is the woman being violated
and what do youmean autonomy? i understand it to mean something like
'the capacity of a rational individual to make an informed, un-coerced decision'

Bodily autonomy: The right to make your own decisions concerning your body and the use thereof.
By violating that I mean someone else preventing you from making your own decisions concerning your body and the use thereof.

It is immoral/unethical to remove someone's right to choose what to do with their own body. Do you agree or disagree?

[Dyakovo]

Whether you would agree to do it or not is irrelevent. People should not be forced into a situation whereby their body is used for another's benefit without their consent.

well ok, then you now agree that unless it was caused by rape abortion is wrong?

No. Abortion, when chosen freely by the woman in question, is never wrong.

[Ookawauso]

1) you said a feotus does not meat the criteria, what criteria?
2) the feotus does not do it intentionally, and in fact most of it is done by the womans own body (i think).
You were showing i was wrong with an incorrect statemeant you have yet to concede was wrong?

1: I already listed them, but I'm feeling generous today... So I'll provide them again...

The ability to act in the world.
The capacity for introspection and the ability to reconcile oneself as an individual separate from the environment and other individuals.
Having a notion of past and future.

2: Intentional or not it happens. Pregnancy carries with it some very real risks that no woman should be forced to undergo against her will.

1) and one day the feotus will meat that criteria, so you should act as though it does now. and where is this criteria from?
2) but if it is unintentional, and it is not the baby causing it them its not a crime

[GeneralHaNor]

It is immoral/unethical to remove someone's right to choose what to do with their own body. Do you agree or disagree?

Do you support drug laws?, because the state has set the precedent that it can in fact remove someone's right to choose what to do with their own body.

[Dyakovo]

1: I already listed them, but I'm feeling generous today... So I'll provide them again...

2: Intentional or not it happens. Pregnancy carries with it some very real risks that no woman should be forced to undergo against her will.

1) and one day the feotus will meat that criteria, so you should act as though it does now. and where is this criteria from?
2) but if it is unintentional, and it is not the baby causing it them its not a crime

1: No, I'll act like it has met those criteria when it actually meets those criteria.
2: Whether or not it is a crime is immaterial.

[Ookawauso]

yes a person is killed thats what abortion is

The criteria for personhood has already been given to you twice. At this point, you're just putting your hands over your ears and going LALALALALALALALA.
I notice you still haven't answered my question.

what question?

[Dyakovo]

It is immoral/unethical to remove someone's right to choose what to do with their own body. Do you agree or disagree?

Do you support drug laws?

No.

[Ookawauso]

well ok, then you now agree that unless it was caused by rape abortion is wrong?

When did I say that?

well, unless its rape they were not forced to have sex

[GeneralHaNor]

Do you support drug laws?

No.

At least your consistent, and yet you make appeals to law when the law clearly shows you do not have the right to your own body, (at least not when it concerns substances the state decided to regulate into illegality)

[Erinkita]

The criteria for personhood has already been given to you twice. At this point, you're just putting your hands over your ears and going LALALALALALALALA.
I notice you still haven't answered my question.

what question?

Do you believe it is moral to violate someone's bodily autonomy?

When did I say that?

well, unless its rape they were not forced to have sex

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

[Ookawauso]

CONFUSING ME!
please if you really think its a good point spell it out to me.
how is the woman being violated
and what do youmean autonomy? i understand it to mean something like
'the capacity of a rational individual to make an informed, un-coerced decision'

Bodily autonomy: The right to make your own decisions concerning your body and the use thereof.
By violating that I mean someone else preventing you from making your own decisions concerning your body and the use thereof.

It is immoral/unethical to remove someone's right to choose what to do with their own body. Do you agree or disagree?

It depends on the circumstances, e.g. you cant kill someone else if their in your body
And then doens't the feotus get to choose what happens to its body?

[Dyakovo]

When did I say that?

well, unless its rape they were not forced to have sex

No-one is talking about having sex. We're talking about being pregnant and whether or not women should have the final say in whether or not to have an abortion.

The "forced into it" was in reference to a woman being forced to keep a pregnancy that she does not wish to continue.

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy unless you can prove that women are impregnated every time they have sex.

[Ookawauso]

It is immoral/unethical to remove someone's right to choose what to do with their own body. Do you agree or disagree?

Do you support drug laws?, because the state has set the precedent that it can in fact remove someone's right to choose what to do with their own body.

I have no opinion on drug laws. I have never taken any other what has been perscribed by a doctor. I know people who have illigally smoken weed, and cigarettes underage, but I have never had an opinion on it myself.

[Galloism]

No.

At least your consistent, and yet you make appeals to law when the law clearly shows you do not have the right to your own body, (at least not when it concerns substances the state decided to regulate into illegality)

Really, those should be repealed, both as a matter of individual liberty and practicality.

[Ookawauso]

1) and one day the feotus will meat that criteria, so you should act as though it does now. and where is this criteria from?
2) but if it is unintentional, and it is not the baby causing it them its not a crime

1: No, I'll act like it has met those criteria when it actually meets those criteria.
2: Whether or not it is a crime is immaterial.

So i can just get in a time machine and convince your mom to have an abortion and thats OK?

[Ashmoria]

They were specifically referring to a foetus at 10 weeks...

I was addressing only that line, and only that, the things before are in material
At some point "it" will feel pain, intense pain the likes I which can only be imagined.
I'm not gonna quibble with definitions, as that seems pointless, alive/not alive, Person/not person, Baby/Parasite...all seems rather irrelevant to me.

ya

but when the fetus IS old enough to feel pain ... some time past 20 weeks of development.... aboritons are done for dire need only.

i dont find it important to force parents to bring babies with devastating birth defects into the world. or to risk the woman's life so that her baby can be born.

[Dyakovo]

Bodily autonomy: The right to make your own decisions concerning your body and the use thereof.
By violating that I mean someone else preventing you from making your own decisions concerning your body and the use thereof.

It is immoral/unethical to remove someone's right to choose what to do with their own body. Do you agree or disagree?

It depends on the circumstances, e.g. you cant kill someone else if their in your body
And then doens't the feotus get to choose what happens to its body?

Yes, actually you can. See my post about justifiable homicide.
The foetus (not being a person) is incapable of making choices, and even if it was it would not have the right to violate a person's bodily autonomy.

[Erinkita]

Bodily autonomy: The right to make your own decisions concerning your body and the use thereof.
By violating that I mean someone else preventing you from making your own decisions concerning your body and the use thereof.

It is immoral/unethical to remove someone's right to choose what to do with their own body. Do you agree or disagree?

It depends on the circumstances, e.g. you cant kill someone else if their in your body
And then doens't the feotus get to choose what happens to its body?

It doesn't have the mental faculties to make decisions, but if it did, it has the right to do whatever it wants with its own body, but not anyone else's. It has no more right to her body than I have to yours.

[Galloism]

1: No, I'll act like it has met those criteria when it actually meets those criteria.
2: Whether or not it is a crime is immaterial.

So i can just get in a time machine and convince your mom to have an abortion and thats OK?

I doubt that he would say a word about it if you did it.

[Dyakovo]

1: No, I'll act like it has met those criteria when it actually meets those criteria.
2: Whether or not it is a crime is immaterial.

So i can just get in a time machine and convince your mom to have an abortion and thats OK?

I'd prefer you didn't.
*shrugs*
On the other hand, if you can actually manage it I wouldn't be in any position to oppose it since I wouldn't actually be a person yet.

[Ookawauso]

what question?

Do you believe it is moral to violate someone's bodily autonomy?

well, unless its rape they were not forced to have sex

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

I did answer it,and shall again:
not if involves the death of someone else

what do you think sex is for? biologically speaking?

[Dyakovo]

Do you believe it is moral to violate someone's bodily autonomy?

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

I did answer it,and shall again:
not if involves the death of someone else

Abortion does not involve the death of a person, so I guess you are fine with it then...

what do you think sex is for? biologically speaking?

I don't care what sex is for biologically. I have never had sex with the intention of reproducing.

[Erinkita]

Do you believe it is moral to violate someone's bodily autonomy?

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

I did answer it,and shall again:
not if involves the death of someone else

what do you think sex is for? biologically speaking?

Then I consider your position immoral.

What do you think sex is for? Are you trying to argue that the only reason anybody has sex is for procreation?