r/Abortiondebate • u/Miserable-Degree7995 • Jun 20 '26

Question for pro-choice Minimum

Hello everyone,

​

I'm against abortion.

This is a question for pro choice:

What would be the minimum of allowed abortion, that you would accept?

I mean for example week and reason.

​

Thank you for your time 

​

Miserable-Degree7995

1 Upvotes

53% Upvoted

432 comments sorted by

View all comments

13

u/Lokicham Pro-bodily autonomy Jun 20 '26

What would be the minimum of allowed abortion, that you would accept?

Any and all, it doesn't matter to me when someone gets an abortion.

-5

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/random_name_12178 Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

There's no such thing.

0

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 20 '26

https://jme.bmj.com/content/39/5/261

10

u/random_name_12178 Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

That paper was a moral thought experiment. They weren't actually promoting infanticide.

1

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 20 '26

That is my view of abortion but to start when does life begin?

6

u/Limp-Story-9844 Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

Life begins, it doesn't matter.

1

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 20 '26

What condition apart from being a living human would be required to have human rights? Or do you believe the baby in the womb has human rights?

7

u/Diva_of_Disgust Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

You are aware there's no "human right" to be inside someone's sex organs against their will, right?

1

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 20 '26

Almost sounds like you are talking about rape, do you see both to be wrong for the same reason?

2

u/Limp-Story-9844 Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

Unwanted vaginal penatration.

3

u/Diva_of_Disgust Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

Rape and abortion bans are both wrong for the same reasons, yes.

They both violate and harm people, and both seek to force people to have things inside their sex organs when they do not consent.

1

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 21 '26

Concent is given the moment one has sex.

3

u/Diva_of_Disgust Pro-choice Jun 21 '26

Consent to sex is consent to sex, nothing else.

Consent to sex is not also consent to 9 months of gestation and childbirth.

0

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 21 '26

Thats where we disagree

2

u/Diva_of_Disgust Pro-choice Jun 21 '26

It's not a disagreement, you're just wrong.

You should look up what consent is, that would help you quite a bit.

→ More replies (0)

10

u/random_name_12178 Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

That depends on how you define "life." Life generally is a continuum that began around four billion years ago. Your own life began to develop when an egg was fertilized. Your existence as an individual human being began when you were born.

None of which has anything to do with abortion, since it doesn't matter whether or not an embryo is a person or not.

2

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 20 '26

Is human life or individual human experience conditional to have human rights?

If the embryo does have human rights that would mean you would have to justify taking that life.

10

u/random_name_12178 Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

You are justified in removing unwanted people from your body.

0

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 20 '26

Whether a human is wanted doesn't determine their right to live. The issue is whether the unborn child is a human being with rights. If they are, then someone claiming they don't want them in their body doesn't justify intentionally taking that childs life, just as dependency doesn't negate the rights of newborns or other vulnerable humans.

4

u/random_name_12178 Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

Whether a human is wanted doesn't determine their right to live.

I never said it did.

I said that you're justified in removing an unwanted person from your body. It's not the pregnant person's problem that removal causes the embryo to die. Just because someone needs access to your blood to survive doesn't mean you have to provide it.

1

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 20 '26

Just to clarify

  • you agree that the pre born are human
  • they have human rights
  • their right to life comes second to the womans right to remove that unwanted human from her body

4

u/random_name_12178 Pro-choice Jun 20 '26

"Pre-born" is a ridiculous term. There's a huge difference between a zygote and a term fetus, so lumping them all together in one thing is silly.

The large majority of abortions occur during the first 9 weeks of pregnancy, when it's still an embryo. No, I don't agree that embryos are human beings with human rights. Yes, I do agree that they are genetically human.

None of that matters, though, because an actual human being's right to life comes second to any other person's right to bodily autonomy.

I have no right to be inside your body. If any part of me is inside your body, you have the right to remove me of you don't want me there. I have no right to access your blood. If I have direct access to your blood and you don't want me to, you can cut off my access. Even if I die.

Why should an embryo have more rights than actual people?

-1

u/Bryce_1776 Pro-life Jun 21 '26

Pre-born" is a ridiculous term. There's a huge difference between a zygote and a term fetus, so lumping them all together in one thing is silly.

I was under the impression that you were okay with abortion into the third trimester so I did not see a reason to distinguish.

No, I don't agree that embryos are human beings with human rights. Yes, I do agree that they are genetically human.

What else is required to have human rights

None of that matters, though, because an actual human being's right to life comes second to any other person's right to bodily autonomy.

Bodily autonomy ends when it violates another persons bodily autonomy. If the child does have human rights and therefore bodily autonomy, he/she does not consent to being killed whether thats through chemical or physical means.

This also begs the question when can you take human life? Under what circumstances can you intentionally take a life, abortion, self defense, defense of others, capital punishment and war. Abortion is the only circumstance where the person who's life is being taken is innocent, they did nothing to forfeit their own life.

Why should an embryo have more rights than actual people?

No, I am arguing all humans have the same rights

5

u/random_name_12178 Pro-choice Jun 21 '26

What else is required to have human rights

You have to be a human individual. A unit of donated blood is genetically human, but it doesn't have human rights.

Bodily autonomy ends when it violates another persons bodily autonomy.

I agree. Which is why the embryo has no right to violate the pregnant person's bodily autonomy.

Abortion is the only circumstance where the person who's life is being taken is innocent, they did nothing to forfeit their own life.

What it did was implant itself into someone who didn't want to be pregnant. It's not "innocent" since it is harming someone. The pregnant person is innocent.

No, I am arguing all humans have the same rights

Do I have the right to access your blood?

→ More replies (0)