• Apytele
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    See I like that you acknowledge that they’re possibly people because the entire debate on that is a smokescreen to distract from the fact that people or not they don’t have a right to use the mothers body as life support.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      This is a good point. In every other context, nobody is forced to help anyone else.

      You’re not forced to give up your kidney because Jimmy over there needs it and you’re the only match. You get to choose whether to help Jimmy.

      This is the only context where someone is forced into giving aide to another living thing whether they want to or not.

      We have laws against being cruel to animals, and harming our fellow humans, but there are no laws against not helping except for this. That’s an incredibly powerful argument. Thanks.

      • Apytele
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        At some point I wrote an ode to “A Modest Proposal” where I suggest that men be required to provide anatomical gifts to their progeny (blood, skin, and any duplicate organ including eyes) to even out the cost to the mother in the creation of a child. The increased gravity of the gift is evened out by the decreased likelihood- giving a kidney would be harder on the body, but is less likely to be needed.