The Instigator
Pro (for)
Anonymous
The Contender
Challenge Period
Open Debate

Abortion: Bodily Autonomy And Integrity Is A Paradox

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Challenge Expired
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Challenge Expires In
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/26/2021 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Challenge Period
Viewed: 206 times Debate No: 127706
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Pro

The 2nd Definition Of A Paradox (According to Google): A statement or proposition that, Despite sound (or apparently sound) reasoning from acceptable premises, Leads to a conclusion that seems senseless, Logically unacceptable, Or self-contradictory.

Definition of "Bodily Autonomy": The right for a person to govern what happens to their body without external influence or coercion. [1]

Reasons why it is a paradox:
1. A woman has to have an external influence to make decisions for herself because what if the woman doesn't know how to commit an abortion without damaging her own body.
2. Teaching kids this is ironic because they have parents (which counts as an external influence).
3. Even when you have governance over your own body, You'll inadvertently use force against your body.
4. Abortions aren't just willy nilly and hunky dory, They can cause real harm to you internally.
5. You are your own external influence, As much as you are someone else's if they are in similar situations.
6. Coercion doesn't have to be from anybody else but you to demonstrate the irony of this said paradox.
7. When it comes to integrity alongside with this paradox, You can't have one without the other.

[1] https://www. Rchsd. Org/2019/12/seven-steps-to-teaching-children-body-autonomy/#:~:text=Body%20autonomy%20is%20the%20right, Without%20external%20influence%20or%20coercion
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by steveja 2 months ago
steveja
Yes - there is a paradox, But this entirely misses the MAIN POINT. At what point to we confer civil & human rights on the fetus/child?

I don't greatly care if some, Cognizant adult maims herself - that is their personal business. As a member of society I care a lot if some cognizant person harms another human - that is criminal. WHEN EXACTLY should we confer human rights on a fetus is the main issue that is constantly side-stepped. I'm not anti-abortion, But I am anti-aggression. I think that the historic social norm, That a fetus has some limited but significant rights at ~3 or 4 month is "about right". I can accept that "corner cases" exist in the case of very young pregnant females, Incest & rape. OTOH if you carry a 4 month-old fetus from a voluntary conception then YOU are responsible for the next 18 years+5months.

"A woman's right " is high-order political demagoguery - a junky idea. Does a woman have a right to kill her 5yo child? Why not? The answer is embedded in the issue of EXACTLY WHEN the "infant" gains rights. Without a first answer to that issue the rest is garbage. .
Posted by Dr.Smiley 2 months ago
Dr.Smiley
Very interesting argument, Hopefully, You can get someone who disagrees.
Posted by Leaning 2 months ago
Leaning
Jah, I can see the paradox.
But I don't think generalized statements are 'bad,
Implications are enough for people at times.
Spirit of the law, Rather than the letter of the law, So to speak.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.