We could say the same about you right now too.
It is exactly like that. You are placing a person in a situation you know will result in their death.
But does the boat owner have the right of coercion over the guest, considering the fact that the guest owns himself and his body is his property?
And if they don’t want to take that person under their care? [ ie abortion ]
Explain how the fertilized egg implanted during invitro fertilization is not invited. Explain how people who are trying to have children and get pregnant are not inviting the pregnancy. If you can explain that then we can continue. I have repeated my position frequently.
No, it isn’t.
Prove that the not-yet-extant can be invited.
You can say whatever you please. But what you say doesn’t change the fact that human beings are not fetuses…and vice-versa.
They have already taken the person under their care. That decision has been made, just like inviting someone on the boat.
Your afraid to respond because you dont have an explanation. Your theory is incomplete and fails basic logic and you know it. If your scared just say your scared.
No, they do not. And you have to show that the woman loses her right of self-ownership while pregnant. You also have to show that the not-yet-extant is invited. Then you have to show that there’s some obligation. Then you have to show that it’s binding. Then you have to show that while pregnant, it is not possible for a woman to change her mind.
Tall task you’ve set yourself, Max. Methinks you’re just going to keep asserting. So how about you spare us all your blatant assertions and slink back to your little project, since we all know that only you ever do anything for liberty.
See we can’t agree.
Prove that the not-yet-extant can be invited.
So what? That doesn’t mean you get to cop-out, Max. That’s the coward’s way out. Don’t be a coward.
You have no defintion of when human life begins, until you do, a discussion of human rights with you is pointless.
If they are contemplating an abortion, then no they haven’t. Even if they already have there is no reason they cannot change their mind.
This is my last response to you. If you want to participate, then explain your position. I have detailed mine exhaustively on this matter. To expect a further response you are going to have start contributing and explaining your counter position. I have given you several openings and you have slithered away.
Oh, but Max thinks that pregnant woman lose the right to change their minds. After all: they’re merely chattel.
We went over this already, and I showed to you that life is a continuum. Life has probably existed for millions of years. Those points are academic and irrelevant.
If they are pregnant then the baby is under their care, by definition.
If they can change their mind then we are back to the boat scenario, which you never fully answered, unsurprisingly.