[RD] Abortion is either murder or not. You can't have it both ways.
- Thread starter caketastydelish
- Start date
Regarding the overarching premise, as expressed in the title, this rule rarely works outside of very formalized systems (where it has a reason to exist, which is practical). Social discourse (of course) is anything but a formal system, and there you very easily can have both x and not x be "true", in a variety of ways (qualifiers, different definitions for parts of x, combinations etc).
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
I think seatbelt laws were designed to fight those who were going to shame everyone into not wearing them. The majority knew they wanted to wear them and knew socially they weren't going to without some kind of imposition.
I read that one. Kinda unsure why "manners" are important but "wearing a seat belt for the obvious benefits it provides" is not. As in, I get why manners are important. Public indecency along similar lines. But manners aren't seat belts. Zoning laws aren't seat belts. There's no commonality of law that binds the three together, either.
But you argument seems to boil down to "bodily autonomy trumps people not wanting you to die", which is an odd one. I guess understandable at the personal level (not saying I agree, mind). Especially odd though considering your position on abortion. If the bodily autonomy of an adult was as inviolate as you seem to want it to be, that is. Just failing to see the consistency.
Farm Boy
run boy run
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 26,613
No. We are what we do repeatedly. We are our common thoughts. Our typical reasons. Our self image.
1000 or more time times a year. It internalizes. And everybody knows it isn't for anybody else, you're being told what to do, alone, for your own good.
People are who they are from one issue to another. More important issues with lessons learned in tow.
They're terrible laws.
1000 or more time times a year. It internalizes. And everybody knows it isn't for anybody else, you're being told what to do, alone, for your own good.
People are who they are from one issue to another. More important issues with lessons learned in tow.
They're terrible laws.
Repeating something doesn't make it true. But there's probably a valid critique with regards to personal responsibility in cases of an accident r.e. the hell that is insurance.
Your argument that the law is superfluous because it's ingrained has little to do with bodily autonomy. If it's something we do anyway. If it internalises, that is. If it's something we're already doing, what's the violation? Where is the actual harm?
The harm is what the state does to people who do not do what they are told. The fact that this harm anecdotally seems to be stratified by race just enhances the harm.
Spoiler Anecdote :
Oh, I understand the impact of poor (or outright bigoted) policing. But this isn't a problem with seat belt laws anymore than it is anything else (like how black women are more at risk being pregnant according to mortality statistics).
Farm Boy
run boy run
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 26,613
Every animal trained by its environment. We have a whole thread of posters irritated by the lack of respect for bodily autonomy as our society struggles to weigh it against emerging personhood and citizenship. Yet they themselves are so trained to give it up for no benefit to society whatsoever and to propagate their self choices through coercion.
We get the society we deserve in a lot of ways.
We get the society we deserve in a lot of ways.
Last edited:
Yes, these two things are definitely comparable. Being told you have to wear a seatbelt, and telling women they absolutely have to carry a fetus to term. Man, here was me hoping this wouldn't be the takeaway. We get what we deserve, as you said.
Farm Boy
run boy run
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 26,613
There's more than one point. But yes. Empathy for decisions one doesn't think are good in situations one is not invested in are easier to let go than ones that people are emotionally invested in. And they aren't all very empathic now, are they? We've got whole states that would lock up women "as punishment" when they've already lost their child. You think training doesn't actually work? It does, very well. Can train people to think in a lot of ways. Some of them are nicer than others. Some of them have different principles in different orders. They all move the needle.
And yes, for the record, it is really stupid to think that carrying a fetus and snapping the belt are the same. But they are definitely comparable. They exist in the same plane at different points.
And yes, for the record, it is really stupid to think that carrying a fetus and snapping the belt are the same. But they are definitely comparable. They exist in the same plane at different points.
That's some extreme latitude with comparable, there. They both exist in reality, I guess. But it's kind of silly to make the comparison because we weight things regardless of emotional investment, or rather, in addition to it. Making someone wear a seat belt (prejudiced policing aside for the moment) and making someone carry a fetus to term are only comparable insofar as someone is doing the making. People will judge the validity of both differently, on a number of scales.
That's my consistency. Wearing a seat belt doesn't hurt you. You're raised; trained to do it anyway. The cost-benefit analysis (avoiding emotional investment) is pretty plain and simple. Being pregnant? Permanently alters the body (often negatively). Neverminding the life of the fetus, it's far more complicated from the offset. This is why people often weight along a curve (i.e. why weeks along is often the line of argument, when it's not bodily autonomy outright). And when it comes to bodily autonomy, looking at something like seatbelts is basically treating it as an all-or-nothing approach to peoples' support of autonomy. Why? It's contextual. It's always contextual.
That's my consistency. Wearing a seat belt doesn't hurt you. You're raised; trained to do it anyway. The cost-benefit analysis (avoiding emotional investment) is pretty plain and simple. Being pregnant? Permanently alters the body (often negatively). Neverminding the life of the fetus, it's far more complicated from the offset. This is why people often weight along a curve (i.e. why weeks along is often the line of argument, when it's not bodily autonomy outright). And when it comes to bodily autonomy, looking at something like seatbelts is basically treating it as an all-or-nothing approach to peoples' support of autonomy. Why? It's contextual. It's always contextual.
Farm Boy
run boy run
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 26,613
It is always contextual.
If bodily autonomy does not provide for allowing you to make decisions that might, if unlucky, "cause yourself only to die" then it certainly does not provide for purposefully killing what is wavering on the consideration of full personhood. Something else might. Like they're both going to die unless you treat it anyways. Or the further bodily autonomy loss of enforceable sexual slavery, which is what you get when you remove exceptions for rape.
That you (correctly) identify the situations are so far apart on the planes of comparison is just an indication of how little people actually give a crap about autonomy once the rubber hits the road. It's almost beneath contempt.
If bodily autonomy does not provide for allowing you to make decisions that might, if unlucky, "cause yourself only to die" then it certainly does not provide for purposefully killing what is wavering on the consideration of full personhood. Something else might. Like they're both going to die unless you treat it anyways. Or the further bodily autonomy loss of enforceable sexual slavery, which is what you get when you remove exceptions for rape.
That you (correctly) identify the situations are so far apart on the planes of comparison is just an indication of how little people actually give a crap about autonomy once the rubber hits the road. It's almost beneath contempt.
Senethro
Overlord
Really? This is where we're at?
The fact that pro-life people for the most part do not act as if a zygote is a human life when it is not inside a human womb, thus demonstrating the location is significant is a point beneath anyones dignity to ever answer.
But safety equipment for operators of heavy machinery that aids in maintaining control is the slippery slope to loss of bodily autonomy?
The fact that pro-life people for the most part do not act as if a zygote is a human life when it is not inside a human womb, thus demonstrating the location is significant is a point beneath anyones dignity to ever answer.
But safety equipment for operators of heavy machinery that aids in maintaining control is the slippery slope to loss of bodily autonomy?
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Or that your kid doesn't want to seem uncool, sure.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Look, it's totally authoritarian, inconsistent with liberalism-as-freedom. I agree. I think we all agree. I think this is one of those cases when the cost is so low and the benefits are so high no one cares. Scale is another differentiator in category— despite 7th grade geometry, congruency isn't always a superior differentiator from size. We're taught to recognize square from triangle but sometimes big and small matters more. As adult, I feel differently, but... For the sake of my younger self, I'm glad we were authoritarian on the issue of seat belts. Justified by our other tradition, liberalism-as-benthamism, a small oppression for a great gain.
But agreed, we can take America to a higher glory
Link to video.
But agreed, we can take America to a higher glory
Link to video.
Similar threads
- Poll
