My wife agrees with me on this. As for everything and everyone else, I’d cross that bridge if I came to it.
Doing the right thing and helping others sometimes entails risk. This is a tiny risk, though, so I’m not patting myself on the back.
I’m also willing to lie to the Gestapo about whether there are Jews taking refuge in the basement.
…I would be willing to lie to the Gestapo as well. But this is utterly irrelevant.
Are you going to be joining iiandyiii and declaring that you will lie to the courts? Do you intend to be number two?
There you have what, exactly? And are you really that naive with regards to fundamental moral axioms and reality?
Actually they are.
Of course, this is all just part of an amusing conversation. In truth, I would never lie to any official. By coincidence, I do happen to travel by car or cash-paid bus ticket to Oklahoma regularly. And I hate condoms.
No they’re not. No one is entering or remaining in someone’s body without their continual consent in your examples.
…if the law is enacted it is a bridge that you will have to face, and I’ll be the first to remind you of it.
But it isn’t a tiny risk. Its a huge risk. Because it is doomed to failure. Do you really think that your lie would stand up to even the tiniest bit of scrutiny? Your wife will have to lie. They will pour over your social media. They will check your travel records. DNA tests. And you’ve admitted you intend to lie about this in court here.
There are more effective ways to fight and defeat this than with silly stunts that are doomed to fail and make things worse.
You’re right. I retract everything I’ve said and totally agree with you, and next time I travel to Oklahoma (without condoms) I’ll be sure to keep this in mind. 
Women aren’t going to be forced to carry pregnancies to term, they’re going to be forced to have back alley “miscarriages,” and some of them are going to die.
Are women also going to need permission for Plan-B?
The hyperbole is amusing, though, as if every doctor who gets a permission slip is going to spend thousands of dollars digging on the off chance that their patient is lying.
You’ve already admitted you’d lie under oath. You have no credibility. At least on this subject.
Goal post moving.
If she changes her mind, a paternity test would clear that right up. I would think that any affidavit would be an indicator of possible paternity, not an admission of definite paternity.
Unless the subsequent laws were structured in such a way that signing the consent form constituted an ironclad agreement to assume financial responsibility in the case of a full term baby.
Ah, but this is all part of my plan to get out of paying child support for the multiple women in Oklahoma that I impregnated.
As for bodily autonomy, that’s always been control over what enters or remains in one’s body.
Again you’ve admitted you are either a perjurer or an adulterer. Either way no integrity. Good thing you’re a former naval officer.
Are you saying that being subject to taxation is a loss of bodily autonomy?
It’s not. Not even remotely. You aren’t “forced to work,” bodily or not. You have options. Go off the grid, have no income, go to a barter system.
Even if you choose to work, and thus pay taxes, it’s still not forced loss of bodily autonomy. You can choose to work in an intellectual capacity, and taking your money (in the form of taxes) isn’t any kind of bodily invasion. No one is forcing you to do anything physically.
I hope I have simply skimmed too quickly and missed some nuance of your argument. If I have, please correct me.
If your argument is that taxation (with representation) is a loss of bodily autonomy-- well, I am at a loss as to how even remotely makes sense.
Better either of those than someone who didn’t take minor action to protect women from oppression. Lying is sometimes the only just option.
My flight (to Oklahoma? I’ll never tell 
) is about to take off, so I’ll have to turn off my phone in a minute, in case I disappear.
Perhaps a better analogy is helping escaped slaves get to Canada. It violates the law, but is morally defensible. The state of Oklahoma is trying to make body-slaves of pregnant women. Helping them find freedom is admirable, not reprehensible.
As noted, it’s moot anyway, as the law cannot pass constitutional muster.
But it does raise the valid point: at what point does civil disobedience become morally permissible?
Depends on your morals or lack thereof.