"Pro-Choice" Advocates Should Be Jailed for Anarchy

[Daktoria]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assumption_of_risk

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonism

I'm not sure why pro-choicers call themselves pro-choice because they're really not.

What the pro-choice position advocates is the choice to assume the risk of forcing personhood into existence without prior consent, and then condemning it to extermination.

Unfortunately, it doesn't get much more coercive than this because it forces innocents to prove themselves rather than treating people as innocent before proven guilty. The implication is anarchy where people are entitled to push preborns around primarily based on might makes right. Innocents are not entitled to choose how to exercise their innocence, but rather have to exercise themselves to others' satisfaction. This is cultural imperialism, psychological projection, and violates freedom of assembly.

Furthermore, might makes right is the definition of anarchy which is antithetical to the rule of law.

Therefore, anyone who takes a pro-choice position should be thrown in jail or at least labeled an outlaw.

(To be clear, I don't support conservative rugged individualism or hierarchic family values.

I also don't support libertarian natural selection.)

[The Tooth]

Upsetting right-wing anti-choice freedom haters is not a crime.

You can pretend clumps of cells are people if you want, but no one should be obliged to humour you. But since youdo assume that clumps of cells are people, you must realize that anti-choice freedom haters who conceive also force people into existence without prior consent (although it's not clear how one would procure prior consent from people who, prior to conception, don't exist. Who would you ask?). By your own argument, the very act of conception should result in jail time for all pregnant women, and presumably the men who impregnated them as well.

And don't forget that unlike clumps of cells, pregnant women really are people. So how do you feel about forcing women to have children against their will? How high does that ping your coercometer?

I understand that people who oppose forcing women to have children against their will upset you, but upsetting you isn't grounds for jail time.

[The Dharma Bum]

All living organisms are clumps of cells.

[The Tooth]

Single-celled organisms aren't. But I thank you for your pedantic if irrelevant observation. Where do you stand on forcing women to bear children against their will?

[The Dharma Bum]

The basis of your argument was that an embryo is merely a clump of cells so it isn't a person. However adults are merely clumps of cells as well so it's hardly an irrelevant observation.

I believe that pregnancy is a medical condition and as such it is up to the mentally competent individual to decide their own course of action.

[The Tooth]

All people are clumps of cells, not all clumps of cells are people. But that's not important. What's important is that you support letting women decide for themselves whether to have children or not. A toast!

[JDHURF]

Wow. OP gives new meaning to "wiki warrior."

[Daktoria]

[Daktoria]

[Daktoria]