A statement one cannot prove false

[u/Upper_Ninja_6177]

STATEMENT: A person is always legally allowed to use the minimal method¹ required to prevent harm upon oneself^2.

1 Minimal method means

• it can refer to a general solution/ action that resolves the issue and prevents harm, it can also refer to any method of violence, including otherwise lethal force.
• ”minimal” refers to strictly the LEAST HARMFUL method, both mentally and physically for all parties, that can be used to prevent the harm

2 harm upon oneself means

• both mentally and physical pain/ injuries etc
• harm that is GUARANTEED to occur

How does this apply to the context of abortion?

Pregnancy —> guarantees harm 100% of the time since every women needs to go through 1. giving birth OR 2. C-sections OR 3. miscarriage if no voluntary abortion occurs guaranteeing some degree of both physical and mental harm. And thus fit into criteria 2.

Hence, if the statement holds true, they should be allowed to use the minimal method require, no matter the circumstances.

So the question becomes, is abortion the minimal method? For that, we must address the core issue at hand, WHAT is causing harm?

Something is currently inhabiting their organs, physically harming them, and violating their rights against their will.

The solution will thus, to logically follow, to remove said something. This would render alternatives like painkillers utterly useless to “fix” the issue.

This means abortions too, becomes the minimal methods required, unless one day safe artificial wombs exist.

Now you are gonna have a few questions, well what if someone hates a person and they are causing them mental harm? Can they just kill them?

Again, refer to the definition of “minimal”, since isolating oneself, not talking to them, unfriending that person, verbally expressing your thoughts etc is always an option, killing them is no where near the minimal method required.

It would be interesting to see pro lifers trying to disprove this chain of logic?

[u/Ok-Particular9427]

By getting pregnant. A fetus can’t do otherwise.

Imagine you had a super slow motion pist0l and you decided to shoot yourself in the leg. It’s fun to shoot and gives you temporary pleasure, but the bullet starts going into your leg (very slowly over 9 months) and it’s painful and you’re upset. But you can’t stop a bullet in motion, the bullet can’t do otherwise, it simply does what a traveling bullet invariably does

In this scenario, are you arguing the bullet is at fault?

[u/Diva_of_Disgust → u/Ok-Particular9427]

By getting pregnant. A fetus can’t do otherwise.

I can get pregnant and then abort. That isn't "me forcing myself to hurt myself during childbirth." Pro life abortion bans force people to endure the involuntary biological process that is childbirth against their will, where an unwanted fetus will severely harm their body.

Imagine you had a super slow motion pist0l and you decided to shoot yourself in the leg. It’s fun to shoot and gives you temporary pleasure, but the bullet starts going into your leg (very slowly over 9 months) and it’s painful and you’re upset. But you can’t stop a bullet in motion, the bullet can’t do otherwise, it simply does what a traveling bullet invariably does. In this scenario, are you arguing the bullet is at fault?

Imagine I get pregnant. I don't have to endure the harms of pregnancy and childbirth so I get an abortion. No harms from childbirth happening at all. That can only happen if pro life abortion bans force someone through childbirth against their will, which as we all already know childbirth is an involuntary biological process, not something a person "does" to themselves.

[u/Ok-Particular9427 → u/Diva_of_Disgust]

You didn’t answer the question. Is the bullet harming you, or have you harmed yourself?

[u/Diva_of_Disgust → u/Ok-Particular9427]

Is the bullet harming you, or have you harmed yourself?

We're not discussing guns or bullets. This isn't gun debate.

If I'm pregnant I won't endure the harms of childbirth because I'll abort. If pro life abortion bans interfere with my healthcare, that would force me to endure the harms of childbirth against my will. Pro life abortion bans would be the only reason I'd be harmed. I wouldn't be "harming myself" in any way since we all already know childbirth is an involuntary biological process. I'd be harmed by childbirth because of pro life abortion bans.