160
submitted 8 months ago by filoria@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

When it can live outside of another person’s body. Just like how no matter how much I want a kidney that you promised me if you decide that you are no longer willing to undergo surgery to give it to me, even if I’m already knocked out to receive it, you can back out. You are the ultimate master of your body, but so is everyone else.

[-] CableMonster@lemmy.ml -3 points 7 months ago

Okay, so then you believe that a person has rights when they can survive outside of the woman. So then the humanity of a fetus depends on location of the mother because in some countries the fetus can be born much earlier due to medical technology. That is not a logical stance.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

I believe that the fetus’s right to live doesn’t supersede a person’s right to not be pregnant. That is a logical and consistent stance.

[-] CableMonster@lemmy.ml -1 points 7 months ago

Thats not a logical stance if you dont have a logical point at which the fetus gets rights.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

At no point is any person ever required to maintain using their body to keep someone else alive. If it’s your job and you don’t do it you may need professional consequences but never jail.

The fetus has rights but they all fall below that right of bodily autonomy.

[-] CableMonster@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago

That is what makes pregnancy a unique situation, another person is required to keep a fetus alive. If the fetus has the right of bodily autonomy, then the consensual act of making it was the consent to carry the fetus 9 months.

this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
160 points (94.4% liked)

World News

32287 readers
1191 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS