Abortion: human right?

[Tarsonis Survivors]

How nihilist of you.

No, it's true. Even completely 'selfless' acts are selfish - you do them, because it makes you feel good.

Nietzsche would be proud.

[Nimzonia]

Irrelevant. If I decide to juggle chainsaws, I may not consent to having my leg chopped off, but that won't stop it from happening.

juggling chainsaws and getting pregnant are two completely different things, obviously.

Having sex and juggling chainsaws are both actions that have potential negative consequences, and if you decide to do them anyway, then you need to be prepared to accept and live with the negative outcomes. Saying "but I didn't consent to that" doesn't get you out of the mess you got yourself into. If you take a gamble and lose, it's your problem. You don't have a right for it to be cleaned up for you.

[Benuty]

If women can abort fetuses by themselves unaided, then yes, it's a human right that cannot be taken from them. If not, then they aren't losing anything.

Why does it need to be unaided.?

Because stairs are always effective./sarcasm.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

It's not a fuckin clown car.

Even so, it'd be a slip and slide after all is said and done.

I literally just spit soda all over my tablet.

[Benuty]

No, it's true. Even completely 'selfless' acts are selfish - you do them, because it makes you feel good.

Nietzsche would be proud.

A hack who stole much of his ideas from another famous person who pondered over them really doesn't deserve to be proud.

[Northern-Armeania]

Could you an option on the poll for it only being a right in case of the mothers life.

[Ifreann]

What does that have to do with anything? Are you just trying to insult women who get abortions?

I doubt one has to try. Studies show prevelant guilt in those who receive abortions.

What does that have to do with anything I said?

[Washington Resistance Army]

It's not a fuckin clown car.

Even so, it'd be a slip and slide after all is said and done.

You, I like you

[Nimzonia]

If women can abort fetuses by themselves unaided, then yes, it's a human right that cannot be taken from them. If not, then they aren't losing anything.

Why does it need to be unaided.?

Because this is about bodily sovereignty, and if aborting a fetus is not an intrinsic function of the female body, then bodily sovereignty is not being violated. And, you shouldn't have the right to force someone else to do something for you.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

If women can abort fetuses by themselves unaided, then yes, it's a human right that cannot be taken from them. If not, then they aren't losing anything.

Why does it need to be unaided.?

There's no inherent right to the services of others? If it was natural biological function, then one would have the right to do so. Because it's an artificial termination, you don't have an inherent right to it.

[Greater Israelia]

Could you an option on the poll for it only being a right in case of the mothers life.

It's never right, NA.

[Neutraligon]

juggling chainsaws and getting pregnant are two completely different things, obviously.

Having sex and juggling chainsaws are both actions that have potential negative consequences, and if you decide to do them anyway, then you need to be prepared to accept and live with the negative outcomes. Saying "but I didn't consent to that" doesn't get you out of the mess you got yourself into. If you take a gamble and lose, it's your problem. You don't have a right for it to be cleaned up for you.

Driving a car has the potential for negative consequence, that does not mean we do nothing when said negative consequences occur. When driving a car and getting in an accident, one expects medical attention. Similarly one can expect medical attention and choice of said medical attention. Similarly when having sex and getting pregnant, on gets to have medical attention and choice about what said medical attention is, including abortion.

[Ifreann]

Why does it need to be unaided.?

Because this is about bodily sovereignty, and if aborting a fetus is not an intrinsic function of the female body, then bodily sovereignty is not being violated. And, you shouldn't have the right to force someone else to do something for you.

There's no force involved. Doctors freely chose that profession.

[Othelos]

Could you an option on the poll for it only being a right in case of the mothers life.

the second option covers that.

[Benuty]

Why does it need to be unaided.?

There's no inherent right to the services of others? If it was natural biological function, then one would have the right to do so. Because it's an artificial termination, you don't have an inherent right to it.

What about organ transplant surgery?

[Neutraligon]

Why does it need to be unaided.?

There's no inherent right to the services of others? If it was natural biological function, then one would have the right to do so. Because it's an artificial termination, you don't have an inherent right to it.

They have as much right to it as any other medical decision they make.

[Othelos]

juggling chainsaws and getting pregnant are two completely different things, obviously.

Having sex and juggling chainsaws are both actions that have potential negative consequences, and if you decide to do them anyway, then you need to be prepared to accept and live with the negative outcomes. Saying "but I didn't consent to that" doesn't get you out of the mess you got yourself into. If you take a gamble and lose, it's your problem. You don't have a right for it to be cleaned up for you.

yes, but if you gamble and get pregnant, you can stop being pregnant.

[The Cosmos]

It's not a fuckin clown car.

Even so, it'd be a slip and slide after all is said and done.

I laughed way too much at that.

[MERIZoC]

Section 3 begs to differ:

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Also, for all you Commies fawning over the UDHR, look at Article 17.

Article 17.

(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

The UDHR applies to human beings. Fetus's are not human beings. Here's article 25.

Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

Abortion is a medical service, and thus applies to this.

[Silent Majority]

Certainly won't. And if you lose your leg, you can decide whether you want a prosthetic or to use a wheelchair or to just hop about. You don't lose your right to control your own body. So why should women lose the right to control their bodies when they become pregnant?

If women can abort fetuses by themselves unaided, then yes, it's a human right that cannot be taken from them. If not, then they aren't losing anything.

Why? I fail to see why distinction between things that are possible with technology and things that are possible "naturally" has any inherent moral implications. (In other words, just because something is "natural" doesn't make it good, and just because something is "unnatural" doesn't make it bad)

"You can't do it naturally" is an absolutely idiotic argument against getting cancer treatment, so I fail to see why it should be any more significant against abortion

[Neutraligon]

Having sex and juggling chainsaws are both actions that have potential negative consequences, and if you decide to do them anyway, then you need to be prepared to accept and live with the negative outcomes. Saying "but I didn't consent to that" doesn't get you out of the mess you got yourself into. If you take a gamble and lose, it's your problem. You don't have a right for it to be cleaned up for you.

yes, but if you gamble and get pregnant, you can stop being pregnant.

Similar to if you gamble and lose a leg juggling chainsaws, you can stop the bleeding and possibly reattach the leg.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

There's no inherent right to the services of others? If it was natural biological function, then one would have the right to do so. Because it's an artificial termination, you don't have an inherent right to it.

They have as much right to it as any other medical decision they make.

Healthcare itself is not an inherent right. It's a service provided and deniable by others. Now civil right on the other hand, that's something else.

[Imperializt Russia]

One could say that abortion is against human rights, since Article 3 states that everyone has the right to life, but I'm sure no one would take them into consideration. Abortion is not a human right. It's just a cool little civil right that's guaranteed by your government.

Also, what the fuck is "partial birth abortion"?

"Congratulations, it's twins!"
"But I only want one child."
"Do you wanna abort the boy or the girl?"

You're thinking of a selective abortion.
Selective abortions can be done for a variety of medical reasons, especially with large birth groups (triplets or more, though predictably more selective abortions are performed on twins, as twins are statistically hugely more likely).

[Nimzonia]

Because this is about bodily sovereignty, and if aborting a fetus is not an intrinsic function of the female body, then bodily sovereignty is not being violated. And, you shouldn't have the right to force someone else to do something for you.

There's no force involved. Doctors freely chose that profession.

If someone wants an abortion, and a doctor is willing to provide it, then they can have an abortion. But that doesn't make it a right. If there are no doctors available, all the rights in the world won't get you an abortion. As far as I'm concerned, rights are for things that cannot be taken from you, not for things that must be provided to you.

[Neutraligon]

There's no force involved. Doctors freely chose that profession.

If someone wants an abortion, and a doctor is willing to provide it, then they can have an abortion. But that doesn't make it a right. If there are no doctors available, all the rights in the world won't get you an abortion. As far as I'm concerned, rights are for things that cannot be taken from you, not for things that must be provided to you.

Then by that definition every right you or I have is not a right, simply because they can all be taken from you.