KiigelHeart said:
I did catch the lenghty message you deleted. Just in case you decide to repost, my example of dna-sample to determine fatherhood is how it works in my country. It wasn't a wacky analogy but an example of a situation where to rights overlap and lawmakers can decide to limit another right in a specific situation. There are other examples as well. My intention also wasn't to cherry pick some of your points. Questions like what about rape victims etc. are of course valid, it's just that we've had these discussions in my country and we've had a well-functioning law and system about it for decades. So I thought I won't bother with those as my point was from the begin with that your analogies were deeply flawed.
This is where I get confused. Legal distinction here is a 24-week old fetus, and it's partly based on factual distinction. Rest of your questions are again suggesting that there can't be a legal difference between a fetus and a born human, even though this is the case in many countries. Maybe in US it isn't possible to make a legal distinction then, I don't know but I find it odd. Is this really an ongoing debate in US? That if you don't have to donate an organ to somebody, then a mother doesn't have to use her body to grow a baby? To me that's going into extremes, but teh freedom and bodily autonomy, right? |
Regardless of how DNA tests actually work, if somebody in Sweeden genuinely had a reasonable objection to having their blood tested, do you think they would not find another way to do it that would work without the part they disapprove of? For instance, if in the US we did blood tests for DNA and a Jehovah's witness (they are against blood transfusions and such) legitimately objected, we'd find another way to do it. If on the other hand, they just don't want to be found to be the father, that is not about bodily autonomy.
There is to my knowledge no serious discussion about forcing parents to give organs, or harvest dead organs. Although, there actually have been cases I believe of keeping a brain dead mother alive for the sake of a fetus, so I don't think it's ridiculously far fetched, even if it is unlikely. At any rate, that's not my point. My point is why we find generally find those cases so obvious even if the imposition is incredibly minor, even if it will preserve life, even if there is no legitimate reason not to undergo a procedure etc., and how the case of the pregnant woman is different. The examples were not designed to be realistic, but specifically to isolate the particular reasons one might give that a woman has to carry a fetus to term in any event. But if we want to talk about actual realistic consequences of the law, then there are plenty of those, which is why I shifted.
This ties into factual vs legal distinction. In a court in the US, there are two functions, stating what the law is, and finding facts. Typically a judge does the first, and a jury the second. Generally speaking, the law should, and pretty much must, be consistent on the law itself. To again be overly broad, laws are either based on rights we have, obligations we have, or restrictions on the government. Those rights, are the same, regardless of circumstance.
To use a clearer example, lets go with birth defect. In the situation of a healthy fetus vs one with a birth defect that will likely not result in stillbirth, then the factual distinction is obvious. The legal distinction is incredibly unclear. Why in that situation does the defective fetus not have a right to life? I can't think of a good answer to that, so I don't see how we can justify a 24 week abortion ban with such an exception without it being arbitrary, which I believe it is. A 15 week old vs 24 week old, you can say viability is the legal distinction, that rights kick in at a certain age, but I don't see why that should be the case. And maybe in other countries it ultimately doesn't matter in a practical sense because they're not going to try to restrict abortions at 15 weeks or earlier, but here they absolutely would, so the underlying rationale is incredibly important.
Last edited by JWeinCom - on 11 May 2022
