Does body autonomy justify allowing people to purposely create bioweapons in their body?

Posted by: Mathgeekjoe

I am exploring the limits of what is body autonomy.

  • Yes. It justifies it.

  • No. It doesn't justify it.

33% 2 votes
67% 4 votes
  • Well, I don't agree with changing your body with the sole intent of harming others since this would create an irreversible arm's race, although I believe that full genetic body modification is acceptable., even if it has the potential to harm others. People are going to find ways to harm each others with or without such modifications, and no modification of the body that's physically possible can match the lethality of a firearm.

  • Mathgeek - It is about controlling use of your body. If someone ELSE wanted to use YOUR body as a bio-weapon, no, they could NOT. If you choose to use your body as a bio-weapon, you have the right to, but you are subject to laws that may be applicable when you infect others.

    Posted by: TBR
  • I know what you're getting at, but no, it doesn't mean that you can turn your body into something that harms others. If you wanna be able to defend yourself then take some MMA classes.

  • No as the point of this is to harm others. Therefore why would any establish such a thing.

  • no because thats stupid? who would A. be willing to become a weapon B. just why? C. too expensive. D. a bit excessive i mean we have guns and bullets? why would you need to turn your self into a bomb?

    Posted by: ECLP
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T10:29:32.4740504-05:00
@TheMarquis, I am not thinking about using my body as a bioweapon, Such an act would be illegal under international law, and U.S. law. But the purpose of this poll was to find the limit of body autonomy, which I find it use too often.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T10:30:18.7190280-05:00
So you can't turn your body into something that harms others. So the limit of body autonomy is when it harms another human?
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T10:36:36.7547238-05:00
" no modification of the body that's physically possible can match the lethality of a firearm" Unvaccinated rabies is more lethal than a bullet to the head.
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T10:39:23.8932326-05:00
@Joe: I know where you're going with this. You're going to link this to abortion, and it just isn't the same.
132sque says2015-05-18T10:40:43.6550562-05:00
It's in response to my poll on the alcohol limit of 21 actually :)
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T10:41:26.0271984-05:00
@132sque: Well that's a unique idea change.
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T10:41:36.8849376-05:00
*idea chain
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T10:41:49.0589337-05:00
@both of you, it deals with both, and more. I seen body autonomy many times used on many different topics.
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T10:42:40.2800474-05:00
I see body autonomy used mainly with ideas about abortion and occasionally with substance use.
McHitler says2015-05-18T10:43:07.1944954-05:00
@Mathgeekjoe Rabies is not a body modification, it's a virus. I'm talking about genetic augmentations, as I assume you are.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T10:43:07.5993481-05:00
It is also used in assisted suicide.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T10:44:28.1834149-05:00
@McHitler, Definitely not talking about body modifications. I am talking about bio weapons, rabies is a possible bio weapon, as well as many other things.
132sque says2015-05-18T10:46:30.4807016-05:00
I'm personally all for euthanasia as long as the person has gone through extensive psychiatric help to eliminate depression etc...
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T10:47:21.2868546-05:00
@Joe: You should define a bio weapon in this situation. When you talk about bio weapons it puts an idea of spraying diseases at people from the air. In this context it sounds like you're putting venemous barbs in your arm. If you're talking about the prior then I see no link between this and body autonomy.
dmussi12 says2015-05-18T10:53:25.8828272-05:00
I know I am partly responsible for this poll, but it doesn't really make sense. What do you mean by purposely build a bioweapon? You mean like infect yourself with a disease so it will start spreading? Then no, because your intent is to kill a large number of people. The difference between this and abortion is that killing a fetus is justified. THE FETUS IS VIOLATING BODILY AUTONOMY. THIS IS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT- YOU ARE USING YOUR BODY AS A WEAPON TO HURT PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT VIOLATING YOUR RIGHTS. I hate to be rude, but get it through your head.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T10:55:17.4133922-05:00
@TheMarquis, I thought it was fairly obvious from the question but I guess I was wrong. Here I would give an example. Lets say that you have a person who wants to make a strain of unvaccinable rabies. They first get themselves vaccinated for rabies, then purposely continuously infect themselves with the rabies virus to get it to be able to infect and kill regardless of the vaccine. If successfully this person would have made a strain of unvaccinable rabies which would basically guaranteed the death of all infected. Now technically this person only is doing stuff to their own body, so comes in the body autonomy argument.
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T11:00:23.2722448-05:00
@Joe: That's not how I or most people who support body autonomy view body autonomy. It stops being body autonomy when you become a public threat.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T11:05:09.9012251-05:00
@TheMarquis, so body autonomy is limited by being a public threat. Well drinking alcohol, using marijuana, and illegal drugs can also cause a person to be a public threat. So is body autonomy also not justify use of drugs?
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T11:06:04.7939632-05:00
@Joe: Marijuana doesn't really cause a public threat. For most other drugs I think they shouldn't be allowed but also not viewed as criminal.
TBR says2015-05-18T11:07:41.4728253-05:00
Here is where you are getting tripped up Mathgeekjoe. 1) Sure, if I want to carry a virus, that is my choice, it is my body. 2) My choice may effect others with rights to THEIR body's. 3) I can make a law that says you have the right to carry the virus, but not harm others. PROBLEM) how can this with with the abortion debate? A) It is the fetus that is interfering with the woman's right to control her body. Human/Person to be whatever, IT is still the invader, and the person being invaded has the right to terminate the invader.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T11:16:03.9894386-05:00
"3) I can make a law that says you have the right to carry the virus, but not harm others." Problem here, how can you control if the virus would attack others or not, biohazards are for the most part indiscriminate in their killing. I might be slow to respond to the following post, I am typing on three different polls right now during my study hall that is almost over.
TBR says2015-05-18T11:19:40.9695174-05:00
You are writing out a scenario to your liking. That's fine for conversation and debate. What I would say, since you are being hyperbolical, is you can kill the virus-laden person just as you would a gun-nut on an indiscriminate killing spree.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T11:22:01.2146155-05:00
@TBR, So you are allowed to kill anyone infected with a biohazard even if they aren't attacking you?
TBR says2015-05-18T11:25:04.4897196-05:00
If the person biohazardous person were say, trying to break quarantine, he could be considered the same as the man walking the street with a loaded AK pointing it at people. There is plenty of case law giving the OK to kill the potential killer in these cases.
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T11:28:53.6565060-05:00
@Joe: There's an incubation period and stuff. You can't defend yourself with that.
TBR says2015-05-18T11:38:09.3980308-05:00
To make your scenario work better this is what you have to do. I hate to have to bring this into the discussion, but here we are. What "thing" is invalidating my right to control my body, and do I consent? Virus or fetus, I can accept them or reject them using my body. Now, OUTSIDE my body, is my choice effecting OTHERS rights. The fetus, mostly not (I could make an argument here) but the virus, potentially. If I really like my viruses, I can sit in a quarantined space with my viruses, or I can kill them off just like the fetus.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T11:45:09.3242144-05:00
@TBR, I was going to make the scenario better, I am just stuck in three different discussions, and I am still in school.
TBR says2015-05-18T11:46:19.4471134-05:00
How inconsiderate of you...
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T11:48:04.4520596-05:00
I so resent that excuse! Heil cannot debate because of exams and Joe's scenario makes no sense because he is still in school? I call BS. I am just finally close to graduation, and I have never used my education as an excuse on here. Come on guys!
TBR says2015-05-18T11:48:17.1038218-05:00
Went looking for what is bifurcating your time. You're not in the "Who is looking the best at the Cannes Film Festival 2015?" thought that would be a obvious choice.
TBR says2015-05-18T11:50:59.5556050-05:00
Forget MGJ TheMarquis. We can move on without him. I bet if it were sea-snakes with laser-beam headgear, he would be all about allowing them to infect themselves with nasty viruses.
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T11:53:00.6579110-05:00
@TBR: I want one of those snakes. The virus scenario makes no sense for self defense. "Some guy tried to mug me, so I gave him AIDS!"
TBR says2015-05-18T11:54:39.0279182-05:00
Pat Robertson says he KNOWS "the gays" infect people with the aids in SF using small needles attached to their fingertips.
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T11:55:47.6459939-05:00
@TBR: I'm not gonna lie, if I got AIDS from a fun encounter, and knew I didn't have much time left, I'd wanna give some AIDS blood to John Boehner.
TBR says2015-05-18T11:56:28.3202371-05:00
I was in SF not that long ago. It was a good thing I brought my Barbour waxed cotton coat! Nothing, no aids can make through that!
TBR says2015-05-18T11:59:23.6847676-05:00
I p00p everyday. Every day I want to give John Boehner the gift that keeps giving.
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T12:01:38.0024896-05:00
@TBR: My issue with him is personal. I live in his district, and he treats us like scum in a very open way. I have no idea how he keeps getting ellected because he is mean as sin.
TBR says2015-05-18T12:05:22.9729738-05:00
So how do Ohioans deal with the liquor shortages when he is in town?
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T12:08:09.4739084-05:00
@TBR: Columbus, Enon, and Springfield. I have lived in two cities and one town under his district, and all three seem to have liquor just in crazy excess. You'd think that Columbus would be lighter on bars since they are heavy on mosques, but the booze runs like rain in that city! I also wanna state that Enon, the small town, is the only one of those three places that is conservative. Springfield and Columbus are both very accepting places for the most part.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T12:34:43.0285020-05:00
" I want one of those snakes. The virus scenario makes no sense for self defense. "Some guy tried to mug me, so I gave him AIDS!" It isn't the virus isn't AIDS, the correct name is HIV.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T12:35:38.1195150-05:00
Unholy typo, "The virus isn't AIDS, the correct name is HIV."
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T12:37:35.3853480-05:00
@Joe: I know how HIV works. As a bisexual male people are always throwing facts at me like I am going to get it. I was joking.
TBR says2015-05-18T12:39:17.6134586-05:00
@Mathgeekjoe - I think we are all aware of HIV. Specificity of name does not change the argument.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T12:42:01.5247600-05:00
Just saying you wouldn't be able to give John Boehner AIDS. While you could give him the virus, he would likely take medication to prevent it from becoming AIDS.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T12:43:27.6127564-05:00
"How inconsiderate of you..." What the fudge? I am sorry that I am still in high school and have classwork. The only reason I am on now is because calc 2 finished early.
TheMarquis says2015-05-18T12:45:39.1943506-05:00
@Joe: And now you see my point. I couldn't properly use that as self defense. Even rabies takes a while.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-18T19:41:52.6093041-05:00
@TheMariquis, Unvaccinable rabies kills fairly quick and has no effective treatment. This very different from HIV which has treatment to prevent it from getting worse. But this poll had nothing to do with self defense. For all we know, the hypothetical person just thinks it would be awesome to die to a bioweapon. Regardless, they may infect others without even trying to. So comes down to the question, what are the limits of autonomy, is being a public threat a limit?
TheMarquis says2015-05-20T03:24:24.4922434-05:00
@Joe: It isn't fast enough to be a method of self defense.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-05-20T03:36:45.3512448-05:00
I think I said this like three times, I am not talking about self defense.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

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