AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND

715 readers

418 users here now

This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

♦ ♦ ♦

RULES

① Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.

② Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

③ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.

④ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.

⑤ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.

Please also abide by the instance rules.

♦ ♦ ♦

Can't get enough? Visit my blog.

♦ ♦ ♦

Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.

$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

DougHolland@lemmy.world

456

My body, my choice (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 months ago by DougHolland@lemmy.world to c/aiop@lemmy.world

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I don’t see how those 3 things infringe in your bodily autonomy. People can own their bodies but there should be limits on what you can do to others.

And this is the rub. Your argument about legalizing the individual consumption level, but criminalizing the means to for the individual to consume is how we arrive at the abhorrent situations today with abortion in some states:

You can legalize consumption of abortion services for your body, but criminalize the doctors from performing any procedures that could cause an abortion.

Under your wording, the woman could own her body, but the law has made it illegal for what "others" (doctors in this case) can do to you. Your approach effectively destroys the absolutes of bodily autonomy stated in the OP.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes, there are problems. I was particularly focusing on those 3 you pointed out. But I also think abortions goes beyond bodily autonomy.

First there's the level of being allowed to do it. It's illegal in some states to abort if you find the means.

Then there's the right for medically assisted safe abortion if you so desire. I see that as a human rights issue but not as a bodily autonomy issue.

But maybe I'm being too literal?

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

But maybe I’m being too literal?

I don't think you're being too literal. That's the avenue I'm exploring too.

Thats what I don't understand the absolute nature of the OP picture/quote because it only refers to bodily autonomy is an "essential unconditional liberty". Restrictions on being able to purchase drugs would be a condition to exercising that "essential unconditional liberty bodily autonomy" wouldn't it?

If the avenue to consume the substance is illegal, then how is bodily autonomy unconditional? It isn't. Further, the OP picture/quote cites the acceptance of this flawed premise as a precondition to discussion with them. These kind of topics are rarely compatible with absolutes like the OP picture/quote suggests. Life has more shades of gray rather than the easy absolutes of black and white.