Abortion, Contraception and Freedom
I stopped responding on March 8 - I felt it was a little too much to have a discussion on women’s rights among two men on IWT. Here I go again..
This all started with cheekylibertarian’s masterfully laid out point that a woman’s “sovereign property” right to her own body supersedes the parasitic right of an unborn fetus to leech off resources.
When you asked your first question, I thought I finally found someone who can provide some arguments anchored in reason against contraception and / or abortion (debate I).
1. inbonobo: if you’re a pro life woman, you should hold a funeral for every bloody tampon. If you’re a pro life man, you might want to focus your efforts on things you can and should control, like your own destiny.
2. crythias: I don’t understand how a non-fertilized womb cleansing itself equates to a fertilized embryo that a woman voluntarily created and actively wants to rid herself of.
3. inbonobo: Menstruation is as natural and voluntary as having an abortion and/or having a baby. The pill was invented with the menstruation part to mimic the natural cycle in order to win Catholic church approval, but a woman on the pill does not really need to menstruate. She can choose to skip it by not taking the pills that induce menstruation and taking only the ones that block ovulation. Furthermore, abortion can be induced via a pill as well, so that “a womb cleanses itself of the fertilized embryo”, as you might want to say.
There are women who choose to be on the pill even when they are not sexually active as it helps in better controlling their own biology and it offers protection from certain cancers (to women who have never had babies). As more and more women choose to delay procreation or dispense with it altogether, being on the pill (and often skipping menstruation) may become more natural than menstruating.
Having a functional reproductive system and using it for purposes other than reproduction (e.g., pleasure), even if you imagine that rape never occurs, does not equate to “voluntarily” procreating.
4. crythias: “natural” definition
a) I’ll politely disagree that abortion via pill is “natural” any more than no menstruation via pill is “natural” for the same reasons. I don’t consider menstruation to be identical to a D&E, but if you say so, what can I say? I’m not “deciding” or forcing or anything. I’m simply saying that pregnancy is 95% of the time based upon voluntary actions, whereas menstruation *on its own* is involuntary and has nothing to do with anything being fertilized (actually, it’s more or less the opposite, no menstruation is an indicator of possible pregnancy.)
b) ..not “natural”. It requires conscious effort to achieve. For the purposes of my choice of word, I am using “natural” as a synonym for “spontaneous”.
c) Shall I say, “Spontaneous?” How thin of a hair must you split before you get your way? If it occurs without additional conscious effort to achieve, I’m considering it “natural”, and if it requires a physical external action, then it’s not “natural”. I don’t need to argue this point. Is eating “natural”? No. Digestion is.
d) Did you actively do something to cause it? Then it’s not natural. Don’t be dense.
e) Because they pretty much naturally, spontaneously, without further conscious effort, most of the time will grow to form a baby. Unless they grow to form a plant or pet or something.
(…)
inbonobo: So then you are fine with such procedures being performed, you just object to “paying for” contraception and / or abortion and you selectively protest these while accepting paying for other pills, correct?
crythias: No, I’m not okay with such procedures being performed. But that’s a personal preference, not a prohibition. I can object to something while not saying, “You can’t do it.” I’m against being forced to pay for anything I don’t want to pay for. Stop coercing me to pay for things you want me to pay for.
————————————
Seeing that the debate has moved to debate II - paying for something you don’t want to - I think it may be a good idea to end it. I’m not interested in arguing this last point, especially since we very well may have similar opinions.
On the first point, though it doesn’t make much sense to me, it’s your right to “not be OK” with abortion or contraception as long as you don’t actively support prohibition of such actions. Similarly, though I don’t quite understand your reasoning (or the little I understand I disagree with), it’s definitely your right to hold such opinions.
When debating, I might sometimes use irony but my intention was not to insult you or offend you - I apologize if I did.
Cheers, and Happy SP Day :)
(Source: ginandnola, via stepping-out-for-now-deactivate)
