[ SECRET POST #2031 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2031 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 043 secrets from Secret Submission Post #290.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Good case for Steve

[(Anonymous)]

The trouble is, even if you consider the fetus to be an "actual person with its own life and rights," no one has the right to use or occupy another person's body without her consent. You don't have the right to another person's body, tissues, or organs against their will in order to sustain your own life. Even if that person is dead -- consent is required for organ donation. Women should not have fewer rights than corpses.

That a fetus must die in order to remove it from an unconsenting woman's body is tragic, but the bottom line is, without her consent, it doesn't have a right to be there.

Re: Good case for Steve

[(Anonymous)]

Seriously, this.

Re: Good case for Steve

[(Anonymous)]

If you're going to frame it as a trespassing argument, I believe there was discussion elsewhere on this thread over whether it's justified to use deadly force on a person who has broken into your home, even if the person is posing no immediate threat. Facedown on the floor, hands in the air - any mental image you wish to use convey the universal message of one who means no harm.

If there *is* an immediate threat, a weapon, say - analogous to an abortion medically necessary to save the woman's life - the decision becomes much harder for an objective party to make. But not until then.

Re: Good case for Steve

[(Anonymous)]

1. I'd say a person's body is more inherently "theirs" than the property they live in, so occupying someone's body against their will goes a bit beyond simple trespassing.

2. Even under ideal circumstances, with proper medical care, childbirth carries a nonzero risk of death for the woman. That's enough of an immediate threat for me.

Re: Good case for Steve

[(Anonymous)]

A woman's body is not an object.

Let me repeat that: A woman's body is not an object.

Your argument is completely invalid.

Re: Good case for Steve

[(Anonymous)]

How do I give you all my applause?