@nerdman @dsfgs @kick @mewmew @realcaseyrollins @shampoobottle would be interesting if a man could force a woman to have an abortion
I don't think anyone should be forced to do something they don't want. The woman shouldn't be forced to carry the baby, the man shouldn't be forced to pay for a baby he doesn't want.
@nerdman @dsfgs @kick @mewmew @realcaseyrollins @shampoobottle the man will still be forced to experience the psychological effects of him having an existing off spring though, i dont think its fair nerdman
Life cannot be made fair for everyone, but I think we can go to reasonable limits to have some modicum of fairness. Her body her choice. His body his choice.
@nerdman @dsfgs @kick @mewmew @realcaseyrollins @shampoobottle but what about the choice of the body inside them :^) heres a 22 week baby that was born and survived https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/miracle-baby-born-just-22-weeks-weighed-1lb-4oz/
the abortion limit is 22 weeks in most places .. i dunno if this is all fair
How do I know that IRL you're not Hitler reborn and wanting to murder some culture, hmm? Maybe someone will come back in time and kill you because of your future misdeeds.
I can see right through your 7 VPNs. Stop doing the roman salute!
It's hard but I have a more libertarian mind. If woman wants to get the babby outside of her body and it dies because it's lungs aren't developed, it's the baby's fault.
This makes me sound like a piece of shit but it's the logical conclusion I reach. My main point of contention is that if the woman cannot be forced to carry the baby to term, or even keep the baby because they can abandon them scott free, I don't see why the men have to pay for the shitshow if they don't want to.
@nerdman @dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @a7
This example you give is interesting. You're not a POS, but it'd be interesting to know some specifics; was the baby unable to breathe because it was yanked out early? Or some sort of birth defect? Did the mother do anything to harm the child? These are factors to consider.
What if the woman refuses to feed the baby? Is that the baby's fault, too?
Even libertarianism should have some limits. Parents shouldn't be allowed to behead their children in the woods.
I know the practical way abortions are carried out are as you describe, but the principle is they do it that way because it's easier than taking it out and just watching it die.
And I'm not saying it's not morally wrong, it's just that there's two conflicting moral wrongs. One of the baby being denied it's right to life, one of the mother being forced to be the incubator for the baby. Given the conflict and given that only one person can make a choice I side with letting the person make that choice. It's an abhorrent choice for me but I think that taking it away is wrong.
My calculus on dilemma this is super iffy and I might swing the other way at some point but it stands as stated.
This is not what women tell me and since I can't experience that I'll trust them on this.
There's also the practical benefit. One aborted baby, one baby we won't have to pay taxes potentially to feed, educate and eventually incarcerate. Fiscally it makes sense, specially for poor mothers. And morally kind of too. If you're a poor mother you're going to have a poor kid, and the life of a poor person is hard.
@anornymorse
does banning baby killing really restrict freedom? Freedoms should only be allowed insofar as they don't infringe on others' rights and/or harm them.
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7
@anornymorse
But wouldn't killing the baby infringe on its rights?
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7
And forcing the woman to keep it infringes on hers'.
@nerdman
a women not feeling like carrying a baby is not more important than that baby being allowed to live
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @a7 @anornymorse
@anornymorse
If it comes to some woman feeling uncomfortable or some baby's existence...imma have to say no to murder. Sorry. 💁🏾♂️
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7
It's murder but it should be allowed.
@nerdman
Do you hear yourself rn? Smh
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @a7 @anornymorse
@anornymorse
"Oops! Guess it's baby killing time!" - Me From The Future
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7
Most of the time it's not the mom wanting to ruin your life. It's more about her not giving a damn about it, as compared to the baby.
See? Everyone has the same rights, it's just some people's are put before others.
@nerdman
You guys aren't doing a good enough job at convincing me that "I want to" is a good enough reason to kill a baby
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @a7 @anornymorse
Original-Pastrami-2oz.png
@Grandtheftautism
See? It would even boost the economy! 🙂
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7 @anornymorse
@anornymorse
is a woman not feeling like carrying a baby more important than that baby's life?
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7
Equally as important. But since the woman can talk and the baby can't we go with the woman.
@nerdman
Do only those who can speak have the right to live then?
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @a7 @anornymorse
@anornymorse
Ah! So the weak likewise don't deserve to live.
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7
They deserve to live but they're not preferred to do so. Who gets better healthcare? Those who can pay for the best doctors or those who can't?
@anornymorse
If they really deserved to live, wouldn't you argue in favor of their lives tho?
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7
In order for a state to ban abortion, they have to claim ownership of their citizens. That's incompatible with a republican form of governance.
Priority is given to the one that can give most value with the most certainty. I'd save Isaac Newton from death sooner than I'd save a bum, all other things being equal.
Me too if possible. I'd start with the guy that gave us calculus, mechanics, the law of thermodynamics, first.
@anornymorse
A parent owns her born children too; so she should be able to kill them as well?
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7
@anornymorse
Pieces of paper don't make or break someone's fundamental human rigbts. Otherwise, citizens could legally commit crimes against illegal immigrants with impunity.
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @nerdman @a7
You also forget that all those illegal immigrants were papered in another country.
@anornymorse
I disagree with the state too, so I guess we're even. 🙂
Citizens can murder citizens. In self defense or in the defense of others, because the rights of law abiding citizens are more important than those of criminals.
Also about illegals, their right to liberty is not respected as when found they can be jailed and deported, as opposed to a legal immigrant or native.
@nerdman
Abortion isn't self-defense tho. It's for the sake of luxury in most cases.
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @a7 @anornymorse
The problem in this case is that the baby's right to live conflicts with the woman's right to not have it.
@nerdman
The woman gave that right up when she started developing it.
@dsfgs @kick @mewmew @shampoobottle @a7 @anornymorse
I hate poverty and want it gone. The most effective way of having this happen at this point is lowering the birth rate of poor people. This is my reasoning for this part of my calculation.
As to money being more important than human lves, well, I'll believe that when first world taxes are used overwhelmingly to help third world people.
Note: I don't want this to happen, every country hould deal on it's own, it's just that the "life > money" is EVIDENTLY false, as gross as it is to realize this.
I'm not saying to kill them. Just discourage their reproduction.
I agree. I've proposed giving sterilizations to those needing welfare but it's been met with harsh opposition let's say.
I'm specifically talking about the baby getting aborted. If the woman wants to get the baby removed from her body before the baby can survive on it's own it is not murder, it's just the baby not being fully developed.
The thought of doing it is disgusting to me and I've talked to it about a feminist that said she would never under any circumstances do it, just she wants women to have that choice. This sounds logical to me.
As to feeding the baby, women (and only women as far as I can tell) can drop off babies anonimousy at fire stations, at least in USA and Canada. I hear they have special little cribs for that shit. So, if a woman wants to abandon a babe she can already do that, no harm no fowl. Given she has that option, or the option to give it up for adoption normally, by not feeding it she's murdering it, IMO.
As to libertarianism, I agree. Everything has it's limits. That is why you have libertarians or minarchists as a separate category from anarcho capitalists.