No person, even a fetus, has the right to use another person's body without their consent; if you no longer want the fetus to use your body, then you have every right to stop it from doing so, even if that means it dies. That's just what it means to have bodily autonomy: you have the right to decide who can or cannot use your body, at any time, for any or no reason.
@ZealousSquirrelSocialist8mos8MO
If a person knowingly engages in an activity that has a known potential outcome, such as pregnancy, does the responsibility for that outcome change? For instance, if someone chooses to go rock climbing and accidentally dislodges a boulder which then damages a house, is that person not responsible for the outcome of their choice to engage in rock climbing? By the same token, could it be argued that choosing to engage in an activity that can lead to pregnancy implies accepting the responsibility for another potential life?
@VulcanMan6 8mos8MO
I think this is a really bad argument, because the two scenarios involve two separate rights at play. In regards to pregnancy, no, whether or not you willingly decided to become pregnant in the first place does not change the outcome, because you will still always have that right of bodily autonomy; even if you initially wanted to become pregnant, that pregnancy still requires constant consent throughout the entire process, so if you ever change your mind and withdraw consent, then you have the right to do so and to take action. On the other hand, the outcome of your rock climbing incident… Read more
@ZealousSquirrelSocialist8mos8MO
I'd like to propose a different angle. Let's consider the concept of 'implied consent', which is commonly applied in legal and medical contexts. If you decide to go swimming in the ocean, you're implying consent to the known risks, such as encountering dangerous sea life or strong currents. If a shark attacks you, you can't really hold the shark accountable for infringing on your autonomy. It was a risk you undertook while entering its environment. Similarly, when engaging in an activity that might lead to pregnancy, could one argue an 'implied consent' to the potential of creating a life is given? I'm not suggesting this viewpoint negates the right to bodily autonomy, but might it add a layer of complexity to the discussion?
@VulcanMan6 8mos8MO
While I understand the idea you're pointing out, I'm unsure how it is relevant to the actual issue. Yes, everyone is well aware that sex likely leads to pregnancy (or at least everyone should understand this, assuming adequate sex education), but that still doesn't change whether or not you should still have the right to bodily autonomy to withdraw that consent. Even if you willingly chose to get pregnant and successfully conceived a child, you would still be completely within your right to withdraw consent at any time and terminate the pregnancy, because the consent to pregnancy does not negate your right to withdraw consent during.
