[Abortion][REVISED POLL] If you had the power...

[The Parkus Empire]

Bodily sovereignty isn't a right

Ok. All your organs can now be excised from your body regardless of your "opinions" and then sold openly on the market. Hf.

In that case, I'll be taking one of your kidneys. Lots more people need it more than you do.

Mayhem is a crime.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayhem_(crime)

You wouldn't download a kidney.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

In that case, I'll be taking one of your kidneys. Lots more people need it more than you do.

Mayhem is a crime.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayhem_(crime)

You wouldn't download a kidney.

Since bodily sovereignty isn't a thing anymore in your verse, this is no longer a crime. Aka fuck your consent we're cutting out any organ that would not immediately lead to your demise and proceed to sell them on the open market.

[The Parkus Empire]

Mayhem is a crime.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayhem_(crime)

You wouldn't download a kidney.

Since bodily sovereignty isn't a thing anymore in your verse, this is no longer a crime. Aka fuck your consent we're cutting out any organ that would not immediately lead to your demise and proceed to sell them on the open market.

Wrong, it's a crime regardless of the inane idea of "bodily sovereignty," which a relatively recent idea. Mayhem has been a crime in Anglo common law since before it was even put into writing. "Bodily sovereignty" is a nothing, there is no such right or law in Anglo jurisprudence

[Godular]

Yes Parkus is right about mayhem.

They are however wrong about bodily sovereignty. Yes it is a right, unless your intent is to deny women the status of born persons.

[Galloism]

Yes Parkus is right about mayhem.

They are however wrong about bodily sovereignty. Yes it is a right, unless your intent is to deny women the status of born persons.

I'm not positive you could consider surgical removal of a kidney or a portion of a liver mayhem. It doesn't really maim the person any more than a tattoo does.

[New Emeline]

Yes Parkus is right about mayhem.

They are however wrong about bodily sovereignty. Yes it is a right, unless your intent is to deny women the status of born persons.

I'm not positive you could consider surgical removal of a kidney or a portion of a liver mayhem. It doesn't really maim the person any more than a tattoo does.

Unless they only have one kidney

[Dogmeat]

Ok. All your organs can now be excised from your body regardless of your "opinions" and then sold openly on the market. Hf.

Mayhem is a crime.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayhem_(crime)

You wouldn't download a kidney.

I absolutely would download a kidney if it were possible.

[Wallenburg]

In that case, I'll be taking one of your kidneys. Lots more people need it more than you do.

Mayhem is a crime.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayhem_(crime)

You wouldn't download a kidney.

You don't have a right to your body though, so clearly it isn't mayhem to surgically remove your nonessential organs for the greater good.

[Godular]

I absolutely would download a kidney if it were possible.

3D printed organs...

Hmm.

[Galloism]

I absolutely would download a kidney if it were possible.

3D printed organs...

Hmm.

Working on it, unironically.

[Farnhamia]

3D printed organs...

Hmm.

Working on it, unironically.

Great, I can see the ads now: "We only sell foot-longs!"

But we seem to be drifting off topic.

[Neutraligon]

It invades the woman's body. And you didn't address my point; the Fourteenth Amendment protects a woman's right to bodily sovereignty. Bodily sovereignty is actually a right, as well, or else we'd have mandatory organ harvesting and the like.

A woman's body is her property. Thus, you're depriving her of her property.

You don't have freedom to do whatever you want with your body/property. Outlawing abortion invades neither.

You also don't have the freedom to absolute freedom of religion, or of the press, or any other number of rights laid out in the Constitution. Outlawing abortion does in fact invade the rights laid out by the 14th.

[Ifreann]

Yes

You're going to need a bigger house. There's about 650,000 abortions per year in the US (2014 figures). If the average child lives with you until 17 (let's face it, statistically, when we start talking numbers like these, some will die, run away, go missing, etc), you'll need space for about 11 million children on average.

Or roughly the state of Ohio.

I mean. It's not like you're doing anything important with Ohio.

[Thersersia]

Illegal across the board

[Dylar]

I AM the Senate!

Quit horsing around, Incitatus.

Aww...

Sorry, can't help myself.

[Ifreann]

Illegal across the board

No thanks.

[The New California Republic]

Illegal across the board

Reasons?

[Merattic]

I have been lurking in this thread for a little bit now and while I have not read every single post, I don't think anyone has said anything reflecting my view on the topic so I figured I should just dump my thoughts on it.

For me the key to all of this is when it comes to the consent during the conception of the child. If both people are consenting during this act they are also consenting to the possibility of a child since that is the primary purpose of sex in the first place. Because of that consent, abortion should not be allowed because you consented to this possibility and that would not be fair to the child that is already growing and developing in the Mother's womb. But if one person did not consent, is not capable of consenting or the life of the mother is at serious risk because of the child, abortion should be a viable option. To be clear, I do believe that contraceptives should be widely available and sex ed should be taught in schools since that would obviously decrease the amount of abortions. I think this would be the most realistic way a pro life view of abortion could be implemented in the real world and it doesn't rely on any sort of religious belief.

I'd like to know everyones thoughts on this.

[Ifreann]

I have been lurking in this thread for a little bit now and while I have not read every single post, I don't think anyone has said anything reflecting my view on the topic so I figured I should just dump my thoughts on it.

For me the key to all of this is when it comes to the consent during the conception of the child. If both people are consenting during this act they are also consenting to the possibility of a child since that is the primary purpose of sex in the first place.

The idea that consent to sex is consent to pregnancy has been brought up and addressed many, many times in this thread.

[The New California Republic]

For me the key to all of this is when it comes to the consent during the conception of the child. If both people are consenting during this act they are also consenting to the possibility of a child since that is the primary purpose of sex in the first place. Because of that consent, abortion should not be allowed because you consented to this possibility and that would not be fair to the child that is already growing and developing in the Mother's womb.

Consent to sex isn't consent to become pregnant.

Your argument has been used already on this thread, it was debated to death and we attended its funeral.

[San Lumen]

Illegal across the board

Why? Who are you to interfere in private medical decision? Would you force a woman who was raped or a victim of incest to carry the child to term? Are you going to adopt the unwanted children?

[The Parkus Empire]

Yes Parkus is right about mayhem.

They are however wrong about bodily sovereignty. Yes it is a right, unless your intent is to deny women the status of born persons.

I'm not positive you could consider surgical removal of a kidney or a portion of a liver mayhem. It doesn't really maim the person any more than a tattoo does.

Tattooing someone against their will could probably be prosecuted as mayhem if the DA were so inclined.

[The Parkus Empire]

You don't have a right to your body though, so clearly it isn't mayhem to surgically remove your nonessential organs for the greater good.

"Greater good" is not a legal defense, pinko.

[The Parkus Empire]

You don't have freedom to do whatever you want with your body/property. Outlawing abortion invades neither.

You also don't have the freedom to absolute freedom of religion, or of the press, or any other number of rights laid out in the Constitution. Outlawing abortion does in fact invade the rights laid out by the 14th.

Nope, it doesn't. Not anymore than outlawing heroin use does.

[Galloism]

I'm not positive you could consider surgical removal of a kidney or a portion of a liver mayhem. It doesn't really maim the person any more than a tattoo does.

Tattooing someone against their will could probably be prosecuted as mayhem if the DA were so inclined.

And outside of things like a boxing ring, consensual street fights are still mayhem.

Consent is not per se a factor in a mayhem charge.