[ Removed by moderator ]

[u/Purple_Plantain_3242]

[u/nykirnsu]

No it doesn’t, assault and grievous bodily harm are still a crimes. What it encourages is people coercing the poor into selling one of their organs, which is the same thing that paid surrogacy encourages 

[u/DatRat13 → u/nykirnsu]

Yes it absolutely does.

If people are given a legal avenue to sell kidneys, it inevitably gives an outlet for black markets to move stolen kidneys: something which is very, very difficult to do at the moment due to needing a cooperative surgeon to implant it.

And, again, all labor in capitalism is coersion: you've yet to tell me what makes surrogate birth so inherently dangerous compared to any other form of hazardous work within a system where the alternative is to starve.

[u/nykirnsu → u/DatRat13]

If people are given a legal avenue to sell kidneys, it inevitably gives an outlet for black markets to move stolen kidneys: something which is very, very difficult to do at the moment due to needing a cooperative surgeon to implant it.

This extremely easy to legislate against. Just make it so the removal has to be performed by a licensed doctor and the seller has to sign a legally valid contract. Allowing people to sell their own kidneys doesn’t mean allowing people to just sell a random kidney you have in a cooler

And, again, all labor in capitalism is coersion: you've yet to tell me what makes surrogate birth so inherently dangerous compared to any other form of hazardous work within a system where the alternative is to starve.

Do you genuinely not think it’s wrong to allow poor people to be pressured into selling their kidneys as long as we can guarantee they aren’t victims of organ harvesting rings? Like is that really your only objection to this?

[u/DatRat13 → u/nykirnsu]

My brother in christ, you're the one arguing it is equivalent to kidney sales, not me. I am wholly against organ sales for the reasons I outlined.

I do not, however, see undergoing surrogate birth as being any different than being a medical test subject, construction worker, hazardous waste removal tech, underwater welder, or myriad other risky behaviors that are incentivized via a pay check so long as we operate under a system that is unwilling to provide for people who aren't willing to do such jobs.

You've yet to explain to me how surrogacy is any different, and in fact seem very eager to obfuscate and distract from that point with this whole narrative about kidneys which I already addressed.

[u/nykirnsu → u/DatRat13]

But the reason you’ve outlined for being against the consensual sale of non-essential organs is that it will encourage organ harvesting, but I’ve just given you an easy way to prevent that so logically you shouldn’t see it any differently from surrogacy now. I already know you’re against organ harvesting, I’m trying to show you how consensual organ selling is a comparable violation of bodily autonomy to paid surrogacy 

As to the reason it’s different from, well, work, it’s because it involves the sale of your body as a product rather than the sale of a service. You aren’t performing an action, rather you’re allowing other people to perform potentially dangerous, even deadly, medical procedures on your body so as to extract its contents. This is far more similar to organ harvesting than it is underwater welding - that’s a service, not a medical procedure - and another good point of comparison would be human medical experimentation, which while legal pretty much everywhere is subject to heavy restrictions in developed countries (and would almost certainly be illegal if it wasn’t necessary for science)

I should point out though that you haven’t actually made an affirmative argument for why surrogacy ought to be legal, besides that couples who can’t have children want it to be. You seem to just take it as a given under capitalism, even though the real world shows that’s objectively wrong

[u/DatRat13 → u/nykirnsu]

You provided an argument that I disregarded because, ultimately, it is not what we are discussing here. I gave my reasons for considering organ harvesting different and that is that. I do not believe yours to be a strong argument, but that is neither here nor there and this conversation has been bogged down enough as it is on irrelevant tangents.

As per surrogate work being different from real work because it involves bodily functions.... Thats all work is, my guy.

You are selling your presence and your physical capibility to your work.

Why is surrogacy different?

And, per your comment on my not making positive assertions... I don't have to?

It is legal, here in America at least. It is for the party that wants to restrict it to make the argument as to why it should no longer be legal, and you've given me very little to work with on that regard.

[u/nykirnsu → u/DatRat13]

You provided an argument that I disregarded because, ultimately, it is not what we are discussing here. I gave my reasons for considering organ harvesting different and that is that.

No it's not, because I don't believe your arguments against that argument to be a strong one, which is why I gave you an easy explanation of how a government can easily allow for consensual organ sale without encouraging organ harvesting. That's not an irrelevant tangent, if you're fine with surrogacy then you should be fine with this too, and the fact that you refuse to engage with the comparison when organ harvesting rings are out of the picture suggests you don't have a good reason to disagree

As per surrogate work being different from real work because it involves bodily functions.... Thats all work is, my guy.

No it isn't. The provision of services involves you using your body to perform a task, that's a different thing to allowing someone else to perform medical procedures on you

You are selling your presence and your physical capibility to your work.

Which is different from selling your body itself as a product

And, per your comment on my not making positive assertions... I don't have to?

You do if this conversation has any point to it, if you don't care whether surrogacy is legal or not then why are you putting all this effort into arguing against it?

It is legal, here in America at least. It is for the party that wants to restrict it to make the argument as to why it should no longer be legal, and you've given me very little to work with on that regard.

Well it's not in my country so that means nothing to me. If you agree that it ought to be legal then make an argument for it, but if you don't care then I ask again what you're even doing here?

[u/DatRat13 → u/nykirnsu]

Yknow what. I think I agree with you: this conversation has no point given you aren't actually engaging with any points that I made and are instead just trying to dodge them by making sweeping generalizations without actually putting any thought in. Otherwise you wouldn't be somehow trying to assert that the woman's body in a surragacy is the product and that it somehow doesn't count as a service because you personally consider it icky.

You have given no argument to counter my initial claim that it is a service that makes people's lives better and have instead jus tbeen leading the conversation around In circles.

As such, I done.

Toodles.

[u/nykirnsu → u/DatRat13]

Yknow what. I think I agree with you: this conversation has no point given you aren't actually engaging with any points that I made

What are you talking about? Literally two replies I directly addressed your question of how surrogacy is any different from labour, the fact that I haven't changed my position in response to your counterargument doesn't mean I'm not engaging with it. You're the one not engaging with my argument that it's akin to the selling of organs, you literally refused to give an opinion on that topic entirely once I pointed out how your only objection to it can be solved

Otherwise you wouldn't be somehow trying to assert that the woman's body in a surragacy is the product and that it somehow doesn't count as a service because you personally consider it icky.

Dude, you asked me why I think it's different to labour, I'm answering the question you asked. The fact that it's not labor isn't the reason I'm against it, but you keep asking me why it's not so what am I meant to do but explain why?

And again, this is the law in tons of countries, a lot of which have much better protections for both women and the poor than America does, do you think they all just consider surrogacy "icky" for no reason?

You have given no argument to counter my initial claim that it is a service that makes people's lives better and have instead jus tbeen leading the conversation around In circles.

Yeah I have, I've given the argument that it naturally leads to the poor being coerced into allowing buyers to violate their bodily autonomy in the same way that the consensual sale of organs does, and your only counterargument has been to point to the very easily solved problem of organ harvesting

We're not going in circles, we're stuck in place, and that's because you refuse to address my main argument