OMGAWD! Just OHMYGAWD! You just go ahead and just make rambling, incoherent, irrelevant statements that you can't explain or prove..... no harm will come to women over that.. ....... obscure one liners
Polydectes said: ↑ What? I don't I just don't think someone has the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" That is where you are confused....that stance is Pro-Choice.....no wonder your posts are so confusing for you.
Here's an example. why do you put your name here nobody else does that. And it's literally right after your name. Your posts are trash . first I already addressed this. I didn't call women's rights crap I called murdering babies crap. I consider it b******* for you to say murdering babies is women's rights. no idea why you posted this trash. Sometimes I wonder if you even know what you're talking about your opinion about my post means nothing to me your opinion on what is evil is meaningless And once again I already addressed this trash. I only respond to the argument you make none of the other crap. I already addressed some of it and other bits of it don't make any sense
YOU said : Polydectes said: ↑ What? I don't I just don't think someone has the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" So a fetus can't have """"the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" Try reading what you write
FoxHastings said: ↑ YOU said : Polydectes said: ↑ What? I don't I just don't think someone has the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" So a fetus can't have """"the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" Try reading what you write LOL I used your EXACT QUOTE .....can't squirm out of that !!! LOLOLO
FoxHastings said: ↑ And posts like that show you have nothing of substance... FoxHastings said: ↑ And posts like that show you have nothing of substance...
I think there is no excuse for government interference in ones control over their own body. Your body, your choice. Get an abortion and don't get a jab.
It SHOULD be a 9-0 demolition of the mandates, but we all know full well that the liberal justices are three free votes for the liberal cause. Then you gotta remember that Roberts, Barrett, and Kavanaugh have been squishes on a number of issues. Thomas and Alito can be counted on to rule constitutionally, and probably Gorsuch as well, but beyond that is murky waters. Pray that at least two of the remaining three will rule constitutionally as well (as Sotomayor, Kagan, and Breyer are lost causes).
FoxHastings said: ↑ YOU said : Polydectes said: ↑ What? I don't I just don't think someone has the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" So a fetus can't have """"the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" Try reading what you write LOL I used your EXACT QUOTE .....can't squirm out of that !!! LOLOLO Polydectes said: ↑ What? I don't I just don't think someone has the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" I responded : So a fetus can't have """"the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" ? Correct?
Individual people also don't live inside other people. You become an individual when you are no longer the connected part of another person's body. You are an individual once you are born which also happens to be the time that you gain legal recognition and rights. Unofficially, it is the time when society, both now and throughout human history, recognize that a new individual has arrived and now exists. That's why you don't count a fetus in a census and less official tallies, such as for staying in a hotel(you don't count the fetus as a guest, which you would if it was an individual as you claim). Even the language represents this unspoken understanding. Pregnant women don't "have" a baby, they are "having" a baby. They don't "have" it until it's been born because up until that point, it's not an individual and is instead a connected dependent part of their own body. There has never been any real confusion in human understanding about how birth works. This confusing practice of pretending a fetus is a person(but solely in the way that it can prevent abortion, nothing beyond) only really started when legal abortion as one method for a woman to be in control of her own body instead of it being community property became more commonplace.
It's not the argument I use for abortion, but it's a stronger argument for abortion rights than anti-vaxx. So in both cases people are asserting autonomy over their body. But the limit of freedom is violating the rights of others. The reason it doesn't work for anti-vaxx is because part of the point of vaccination is reducing the risk you are causing to others by less easily getting infected and spreading it to them. This worked better for the original strain though, as it reduced getting covid by 90% but now it's much lower with omicron (well up to 75% if recently vaccinated or boosted). There's also the element of clogging up hospitals with people who would have not required hospitalization had they been vaccinated. This causes people other people to die as hospitals become overwhelmed or burnt out with misinformed or irresponsible people. For abortion, my main argument is that the fetus has no mind and so is not a person before sufficient brain development around viability. But in terms of "my body my choice" one could also argue that requiring a woman to take a fetus to term is the same as using their body against her will to live for another person. Much like forcing a sibling to donate a kidney to a brother who would die without it. Except in the case of abortion, there's no other actual person to harm and pregnancy is a major undertaking. On the other side with vaccination we have definite people to harm, and a relatively minor means of doing it compared to having a baby.
disagree during pregnancy humans have other humans inside of them that's what that means. this control of their own body stick doesn't fly here cuz we're not talking about their own body.
Polydectes said: ↑ What? I don't I just don't think someone has the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" I responded : So a fetus can't have """"the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" ? Correct? Did you not post :"" I just don't think someone has the right to autonomy over someone else's body"""" ? YES, you did....so the fetus should be included in those who don't have "" the right to autonomy over someone else's body""
These are not equivalent issues. Our approach to healthcare problems such as pandemic, car accidents, OTJ safety, etc., etc. are group issues. The whole point of the abortion issue is that it is very clearly NOT a group decision. More crassly, if you get an abortion, I won't catch that. If you refuse to take part in our group approach to pandemic, it WILL affect me. If you choose to ignore traffic laws it WILL affect me.
An embryo is not "a human". It is a potential, and that is all. In fact, based on the status of that embryo it very well NOT be a potential. And, based on the total health picture of the woman and the embryo, the embryo may be a death sentence. This is one more way to know that an embryo is only a potential.
So it's a toaster? Not justification for terminating it. So would you support abortions only for people who are at serious risk of death? That point doesn't support your position. It supports mine.
