[ 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)]

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?