> I'm suggesting the exactly opposite. That by having sex and getting pregnant you don't enter any contract and you don't automatically agree to take any responsibility. You can be punished for violating terms of something you voluntarily agreed to.
I don't think this reasoning tracks. Let's say you're in a bar and get into a heated argument with another person and you decide to "take it outside", as it were. You don't have to fight this person, no one is making you, you both decided to engage in the activity. Now one of you ends up severely injured or maybe even dead, not because that was the intention but because of bad luck.
You agreed to the fight, with the known probability of significant bodily harm even though neither party desired that outcome. Do either of you have any responsibility for that outcome?
> The point is, the law should never require of you the piece of your body.
I think this is your strongest argument, because I honestly cannot think of a reason the state should be allowed to do that and the only counter argument I can muster is that there's currently no other way to bring a fetus to term, which I feel is a weak justification.
> Do either of you have any responsibility for that outcome?
Sure. But does that mean that as a punishment we should break your legs or take a kidney out of each of you?
If conceiving an unwanted child is harm, then just make mother and father pay a fine and give mother an abortion. Don't punish her with damage to her health.
And if conceiving an unwanted child is not a harm, them do the same just without any punishment.
> I think this is your strongest argument, because I honestly cannot think of a reason the state should be allowed to do that and the only counter argument I can muster is that there's currently no other way to bring a fetus to term, which I feel is a weak justification.
That's my main point, that I think is the strongest argument in existence for any right to choice of abortion, even limited. Since I got this point across I'm perfectly happy to end this thread at that. Thank you.
I don't think this reasoning tracks. Let's say you're in a bar and get into a heated argument with another person and you decide to "take it outside", as it were. You don't have to fight this person, no one is making you, you both decided to engage in the activity. Now one of you ends up severely injured or maybe even dead, not because that was the intention but because of bad luck.
You agreed to the fight, with the known probability of significant bodily harm even though neither party desired that outcome. Do either of you have any responsibility for that outcome?
> The point is, the law should never require of you the piece of your body.
I think this is your strongest argument, because I honestly cannot think of a reason the state should be allowed to do that and the only counter argument I can muster is that there's currently no other way to bring a fetus to term, which I feel is a weak justification.