I see. So you admit you have posted another strawman. Lame. How many times can someone lose an argument in 2 days? Let alone against someone who could care less if he wins?
Thus showing that you don’t know what a strawman is.
Kid, quit while you’re behind.
But I don’t care if I come in last.
And yet you keep responding…
Because I know you absolutely must have the last word. You should read some Sun Tzu.
No me!
I believe that life is a continuous process that began billions of years ago. It has never truly stopped since, and won’t likely stop here on earth until the sun itself burns out.
Now here is a question for you. If a pregnant woman owns herself, as I think we all agree she does, in your mind, does she have the right to drink alcoholic beverages and use drugs while pregnant? If she ingested chemicals that lead to the child being disfigured would she be punished in your perfect world?
I am really enjoying this discussion for what it’s worth.
There is no obligation for a person to be the perfect parent. If she were to do something with the express intention of harming the baby then yes that would be considered aggression.
My view is very different than the pro-abortion group because I believe that once a person agrees to take care of another person they are obligated to at least not cause intentional harm. The pro-abortion crowd and in particular this group does not believe that people can have any obligations despite their voluntary consent to care for other persons. So if you go to the hospital the doctors and such in their world have no obligation to actually provide the care they said they would. This is how they arrive at the conclusion that it is acceptable for parents to starve their children to death. In truth the failed ideology of Rothbard and the like is not even possible in the human context it only exists in the library libertarian fantasy world.
I have a questiion for you, do you believe mothers should be allowed to smoke during pregnancy?
yes
Eating unhealthily?
As long as the mother isn’t intentionally trying to harm the baby she is free to do as she likes.
So you’re saying that the mother can do every drug under the sun, smoke like a chimney, guzzle absinthe and eat McDonalds three times a day for the entirety of her pregnancy, which would ultimately cause the baby to be born crippled for life, and yet an abortion should be illegal, why?
Because babies have a right to their mothers, since they implicitly invite it when they invite sex, even though it didn’t exist at that point and even though no formal invitation was made. The baby does not have a right to what the mother puts into her body. So a mother who’s mentally devistated by her pregnancy can ingest poison to kill herself instead of being forced by Max’s gang to take care of the baby.
And with whom was this agreement made vis-a-vis pregnant woman/zygote?
I know–you pro-slavery people just hate women.
Now you’ve contradicted yourself. Clearly, smoking harms the fetus, and is an aggression against it. Willing or not, it IS an aggression. So reconcile your contradiction.
If she were doing those things with the intent of harming the baby then yes that would be aggression. Having bad habits may cause harm to the child but that is not sufficient to punish or prohibit the mother from engaging in behavior you don’t approve of.
It’s still aggression, regardless. If we keep to your idea that abortion is not taking responsibility for one’s actions, and is in fact murder, then necessarily it follows that anything the mother does which harms the zygote or fetus, even without malice, is aggression. After all: not taking care of the fetus by not smoking or whatnot is not taking responsibility for one’s actions!
Hoist. Petard. Your own.
When one person willingly accepts the obligation to care for another person then they are obligated to at least do no intentional harm to the person under their care. When the woman’s body willing accepts and begins caring for the baby the mother is now obligated to at least do no intentional harm. Pretty simple if you believe as I do that people are responsible for their actions.
It’s ridiculous to decide legality based on intent.