In a world of absolute bodily autonomy how can one justify conscription, imprisonment, executions, drug prohibition, anti prostitution laws, etc?
…perhaps we shouldn’t use a “better analogy”. Because “better” is subjective, and I don’t think your analogy is any better at all. I don’t oppose iiandyiiii’s suggestions because I think lying to the courts is immoral: I oppose it because it simply wouldn’t work, and would likely make things worse.
As to “at what point does civil disobedience become morally permissible”: that would be an interesting question for another thread. And I fear that it is a question that the people of America will have to be asking themselves very very soon.
A man can be forced to pay child support for a child he doesn’t want. What is the difference?
if the father knows he is the father and doesn’t want an abortion, that should carry some influence.
Welcome to the club. 
No illegal drugs? And I’m talking about recreational and therapeutic.
Not only does the woman in that scenario ALSO have to “pay child support” (in terms of actually, you know, supporting the child - child support does not cover everything, the woman is also suffering a financial burden) but also has lost control over the one thing she should have control over - her own body.
I would love it if there were an option for a woman to say “YOU want this child, great, take this blastocyte, it is all yours.” But there isn’t. And those who say that a man being forced to financially support child he might have preferred to abort is somehow equivalent to a woman being forced unwillingly to bear a child- well, that’s bullshit. I have known many single moms. My parents divorced when I was young. And we struggled. The financial hardship of support was far greater on my mother than on my father. And that was with my father happily signing over everything ordered by the courts and more.
I don’t mean to discount the financial hardship a father may go through. But it is NOT one sided on the father. The physical ordeal of pregnancy is completely one sided on the mother. And that’s just what the nature – so to speak – of the issue is.
So I firmly believe that a woman should have final say over what her body is used for.
That’s fine. You have one vote.
Using? Sure. Trafficking? That’s different.
As do you. So…thanks for that. I guess.
And willing to pay child support when she changes her mind.
Well, I’ve written a lot of cheques in my life, and made a lot of on-line payments, but you know what?
I’ve never died from it, unlike ~ 800 women per year in the United States, who die from pregnancy-released complications, as summarized by the wiki article on Maternal Death: “In 2013 the [US] rate was 18.5 deaths per 100,000 live births, with some 800 maternal deaths reported.”
Nor, as a result of writing cheques, have I ever suffered from anemia, urinary tract infections, mental health conditions, high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity and weight gain, and morning sickness, which are all common complications of pregnancy.
Nor, as a result of writing cheques, have I ever suffered long-term health effects well after the cheque is in the mail, referred to as “severe maternal morbidity”, which according to the Centres for Disease Control, affects 65, 000 women in the US each year, and includes:
• Acute myocardial infarction
• Acute renal failure
• Adult respiratory distress syndrome
• Amniotic fluid embolism
• Aneurysm
• Cardiac arrest/ventricular fibrillation
• Disseminated intravascular coagulation
just to name a few.
So yeah, all those potential health consequences for the mother, including some life-threatening ones, are the same as the writer’s cramp the dad may get from writing a monthly cheque, and should be discounted. :rolleyes:
What is “some influence”? Are you saying that the guy gets to veto the abortion, even if the woman wants it? Please be specific in explaining to us what you mean.
As much as I’m enjoying this little diversion, I’m going to suggest that if you want to help out a knocked-up Oklahoma gal maybe -instead of performing a dubiously risky act of civil disobedience - you should just help her get to a place that’s not Oklahoma for her procedure
No, his last sentence is an accurate summary of the law relating to male bodily integrity in relation to health procedures. That’s not particularly libertarian. What iiandyiiii is saying is that the same legal rules should apply to female bodily integrity.
Gee you mean i can’t dictate what medical procedures a man should be able to have, based on having had consensual sex with him?
It’s somewhat late and I’ve been driving for the last 8 hours. I generally try not to post when tired, but I’m stepping in here to tell you to knock it off. I suggest you not make the debate personal because that seems to get you riled up. I understand it’s a legitimate part of this thread so that’s a suggestion, however the above statement about integrity is so close to the line I can almost not see it.
I can’t be sure, but it seems like you may be egging him on. Please don’t do that.
[/moderating]
Will trade Sex for Abortion Permission
It is not as bad as it sounds, see now you can honestly go into court, and when they say do you swear to be the father, you can honestly say “Well your honor, i did in fact have sex with her, and she is in fact now pregnant”
That’s like saying you’re OK a woman getting an abortion, but it’s “different” when it comes to the person who performs the procedure.
NP, you are more sensible than that. Thats like saying a mugging is not so bad, cause having metal contraptions pointed at you and emptying out your pockets is not
life threatening. Its not the cheque that is the issue, its the time and effort that money represents. And for many people, thats not a small issue.
Like gun control, abortion is an issue which seems to make people lose their minds.
All that knowledge and you still risk pregnancy voluntarily?
No it’s not, though I’m open to being convinced otherwise. A substance is different than a procedure.