Abortion: Humane or not?

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

It has its own unique DNA, development, and growth completely independent from the mother.

So do many kinds of teratoma.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Well...about 0.3% of births result in orgasms.

This is one kind not available to everyone, though. As a rather huge majority of people born after 1985 in my country, I'm a C-section baby - and in this case, out of necessity (my birth was about 2 days late). Pretty sure all my mother felt was pain.

You mean the 2 days before birth or during the C-Section?

The C-Section is done while the patient is drugged up if they can, if not the pains of labor take care of that one.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

HAHAHAHAHAHA.

In all seriousness, as a biology major, this gave me cancer.

We all have cancer?

[Ostroeuropa]

"Consenting to sex has consequences, it gives the male a boner, and thus it's his right not to get blue balls.
No you can't change your mind, that's a violation of my rights."

You seriously don't see the problem, do you.

Using consent that once existed to justify continuing to treat someone as if they are giving consent is fucking rapey behaviour.

Okay, I must have said something that made you seriously misunderstand me.

Sorry for that.

Yes, that is rape. Very serious rape, actually, rape that warrants very strict legal action.

Yes, you can revoke consent mid-sex, but that's not necessarily the case with pregnancy. I mean, you could get pregnant sometime in the midst of the consented sex right up until the refusal to continue part, which, assuming the guy agrees to stop, means you owe it to the now unborn child in your womb to give birth to it. If, of course, the guy continued to have sex anyway, then that's rape, and you have no responsibility for the wellbeing of the unborn child. Additionally, in such a scenario, the attention should be focused far more on the rapist than the pregnancy that resulted from his actions.

No, it's more that you are essentially using the same rationale.
Why is she obligated to the child?
Why can't she change her mind halfway through?
Because it will inconvinience someone else? So fucking what.
Let them get blue balls/be aborted. She's acting in accordance with her autonomy.

[Dyakovo]

"Consenting to sex has consequences, it gives the male a boner, and thus it's his right not to get blue balls.
No you can't change your mind, that's a violation of my rights."

You seriously don't see the problem, do you.

Using consent that once existed to justify continuing to treat someone as if they are giving consent is fucking rapey behaviour.

Okay, I must have said something that made you seriously misunderstand me.

Sorry for that.

Yes, that is rape. Very serious rape, actually, rape that warrants very strict legal action.

Yes, you can revoke consent mid-sex, but that's not necessarily the case with pregnancy.

Why. What is the justification for making pregnancy the only thing you cannot revoke consent for? Or making pregnancy the only thing that you're assumed to have consented to when you consent to something else entirely?

[Mavorpen]

"Consenting to sex has consequences, it gives the male a boner, and thus it's his right not to get blue balls.
No you can't change your mind, that's a violation of my rights."

You seriously don't see the problem, do you.

Using consent that once existed to justify continuing to treat someone as if they are giving consent is fucking rapey behaviour.

Okay, I must have said something that made you seriously misunderstand me.

Sorry for that.

Yes, that is rape. Very serious rape, actually, rape that warrants very strict legal action.

Yes, you can revoke consent mid-sex, but that's not necessarily the case with pregnancy. I mean, you could get pregnant sometime in the midst of the consented sex right up until the refusal to continue part, which, assuming the guy agrees to stop, means you owe it to the now unborn child in your womb to give birth to it. If, of course, the guy continued to have sex anyway, then that's rape, and you have no responsibility for the wellbeing of the unborn child. Additionally, in such a scenario, the attention should be focused far more on the rapist than the pregnancy that resulted from his actions.

And there is his argument, guys. "Because I say so."

[Galloism]

"Consenting to sex has consequences, it gives the male a boner, and thus it's his right not to get blue balls.
No you can't change your mind, that's a violation of my rights."

You seriously don't see the problem, do you.

Using consent that once existed to justify continuing to treat someone as if they are giving consent is fucking rapey behaviour.

Okay, I must have said something that made you seriously misunderstand me.

Sorry for that.

Yes, that is rape. Very serious rape, actually, rape that warrants very strict legal action.

Yes, you can revoke consent mid-sex, but that's not necessarily the case with pregnancy. I mean, you could get pregnant sometime in the midst of the consented sex right up until the refusal to continue part, which, assuming the guy agrees to stop, means you owe it to the now unborn child in your womb to give birth to it. If, of course, the guy continued to have sex anyway, then that's rape, and you have no responsibility for the wellbeing of the unborn child. Additionally, in such a scenario, the attention should be focused far more on the rapist than the pregnancy that resulted from his actions.

You're missing the point. Broadly. When it comes to most things in law, you can withdraw consent to use your body for that purpose at any time.

Let's suppose I agree to give my uncle bob a kidney. I don't need both kidneys to live. We pay the doctors. We prep for surgery. Just before they're about to put me under, I get afraid for myself. Despite my doctor's assurances that I have no significant health risks, I can't handle it and tell them so.

I've signed legal documents stating, unequivocally, that I consent to this surgery. If I don't, uncle bob will die. I say I can't. You know what happens next?

They cancel the whole damn thing - because I withdrew my consent. Bob dies. I attend his funeral.

[Sanctissima]

Okay, I must have said something that made you seriously misunderstand me.

Sorry for that.

Yes, that is rape. Very serious rape, actually, rape that warrants very strict legal action.

Yes, you can revoke consent mid-sex, but that's not necessarily the case with pregnancy. I mean, you could get pregnant sometime in the midst of the consented sex right up until the refusal to continue part, which, assuming the guy agrees to stop, means you owe it to the now unborn child in your womb to give birth to it. If, of course, the guy continued to have sex anyway, then that's rape, and you have no responsibility for the wellbeing of the unborn child. Additionally, in such a scenario, the attention should be focused far more on the rapist than the pregnancy that resulted from his actions.

No, it's more that you are essentially using the same rationale.
Why is she obligated to the child?
Why can't she change her mind halfway through?
Because it will inconvinience someone else? So fucking what.
Let them get blue balls/be aborted. She's acting in accordance with her autonomy.

Well, the difference is that in one scenario, the rejected person just doesn't get to have full sexual intercourse. In the other scenario, the rejected person dies.

As I've said, the right to life should take precedence over bodily autonomy.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

You mean the 2 days before birth or during the C-Section?

The C-Section is done while the patient is drugged up if they can, if not the pains of labor take care of that one.

Mom took medicine to not have contractions since by around 6 months because there was a serious risk of the womb ejecting me, so at the day D she didn't have enough dilatation. One doctor said one day before she wasn't ready for the childbirth, but in another hospital a day later the doctor said the C-section was in demand.

It still was associated with pain even in spite of the medicine that made the C-section a necessity in the first place.

[Galloism]

No, it's more that you are essentially using the same rationale.
Why is she obligated to the child?
Why can't she change her mind halfway through?
Because it will inconvinience someone else? So fucking what.
Let them get blue balls/be aborted. She's acting in accordance with her autonomy.

Well, the difference is that in one scenario, the rejected person just doesn't get to have full sexual intercourse. In the other scenario, the rejected person dies.

As I've said, the right to life should take precedence over bodily autonomy.

So you do support compulsory living organ donation?

[Ostroeuropa]

Well, the difference is that in one scenario, the rejected person just doesn't get to have full sexual intercourse. In the other scenario, the rejected person dies.

As I've said, the right to life should take precedence over bodily autonomy.

So you do support compulsory living organ donation?

I do I do!
Of cadavers.

[Mavorpen]

No, it's more that you are essentially using the same rationale.
Why is she obligated to the child?
Why can't she change her mind halfway through?
Because it will inconvinience someone else? So fucking what.
Let them get blue balls/be aborted. She's acting in accordance with her autonomy.

Well, the difference is that in one scenario, the rejected person just doesn't get to have full sexual intercourse. In the other scenario, the rejected person dies.

As I've said, the right to life should take precedence over bodily autonomy.

Oh, so basically all the rapist has to do is be threatened to be killed by someone if they don't have sex with woman X.

That makes the rape permissible, right?

[Sanctissima]

Well, the difference is that in one scenario, the rejected person just doesn't get to have full sexual intercourse. In the other scenario, the rejected person dies.

As I've said, the right to life should take precedence over bodily autonomy.

So you do support compulsory living organ donation?

Sure, why not.

It's not like the dead guy has any use for it.

[Galloism]

So you do support compulsory living organ donation?

I do I do!
Of cadavers.

You have living cadavers?

Braaaaaaains.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You mean the 2 days before birth or during the C-Section?

The C-Section is done while the patient is drugged up if they can, if not the pains of labor take care of that one.

Mom took medicine to not have contractions since by around 6 months because there was a serious risk of the womb ejecting me, so at the day D she didn't have enough dilatation. One doctor said one day before she wasn't ready for the childbirth, but in another hospital a day later the doctor said the C-section was in demand.

It still was associated with pain even in spite of the medicine that made the C-section a necessity in the first place.

Well that's a sucky one.

[Galloism]

So you do support compulsory living organ donation?

Sure, why not.

It's not like the dead guy has any use for it.

Living!

Jesus. Compulsory organ donations from living people.

[Sanctissima]

Well, the difference is that in one scenario, the rejected person just doesn't get to have full sexual intercourse. In the other scenario, the rejected person dies.

As I've said, the right to life should take precedence over bodily autonomy.

Oh, so basically all the rapist has to do is be threatened to be killed by someone if they don't have sex with woman X.

That makes the rape permissible, right?

What are you going on about now?

[Ostroeuropa]

Well, the difference is that in one scenario, the rejected person just doesn't get to have full sexual intercourse. In the other scenario, the rejected person dies.

As I've said, the right to life should take precedence over bodily autonomy.

Oh, so basically all the rapist has to do is be threatened to be killed by someone if they don't have sex with woman X.

That makes the rape permissible, right?

If they are actually threatened and in immediate serious danger?
...
I'd say the real rapist is the one doing the threatening, using two people as objects.
Rape-By-Proxy and such.

so, for this analogy, we need to find the REAL baby!
Where is that fucker?!

[Mavorpen]

So you do support compulsory living organ donation?

Sure, why not.

It's not like the dead guy has any use for it.

Who said anything about them being dead?

[Sanctissima]

Sure, why not.

It's not like the dead guy has any use for it.

Living!

Jesus. Compulsory organ donations from living people.

Okay, now you're going overboard.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

So you do support compulsory living organ donation?

Sure, why not.

It's not like the dead guy has any use for it.

Living organ donation refers to the transplant of an organ in vivo, not post-mortem.

Kidneys are not on demand post-mortem, but in-vivo.

[Dyakovo]

So you do support compulsory living organ donation?

Sure, why not.

It's not like the dead guy has any use for it.

>compulsory living organ donation
>the dead guy has no use for it

[Ostroeuropa]

Sure, why not.

It's not like the dead guy has any use for it.

Living!

Jesus. Compulsory organ donations from living people.

Whats a living?

[Mavorpen]

Living!

Jesus. Compulsory organ donations from living people.

Okay, now you're going overboard.

Oh, so basically all the rapist has to do is be threatened to be killed by someone if they don't have sex with woman X.

That makes the rape permissible, right?

What are you going on about now?

The irony here is hilarious.

[Ostroeuropa]

You do, in fact, support compulsory living organ donation.

Because wombs.

So maybe if you could rent-a-kidney for 9 months.