Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

4
  • 1
    The final statement doesn't follow; at least without additional premises. Person is shot, bullet lodges in their body, in most ethical theories, they have the right to prevent doctors from extracting that bullet (assume it would be potentially life threatening to do so) even if it is important evidence in solving the crime. Thus it is not universally the case that everything that is not part of a person's body can not be under that person's control.
    – Dave
    Commented May 30, 2017 at 2:39
  • the argument that the foetus is part of the body is perfectly valid and makes sense. Would you say that sperm and eggs dont make part of the body ? If you have a proper definition of what doesnt make part of the body, you must state it to advance the debate. Commented Jan 22, 2019 at 1:00
  • @Dave I have stated in my answer why it makes part of the body Commented Jan 22, 2019 at 1:01
  • At first, the argument is valid: 1. The fetus is the part of the woman's body. 2. A woman has full ability to decide what to do with her body parts. 3. Therefore, abortion is legal. What you might argue for is that this argument is unsound, because you do not accept the first premise. And yet, even then you would need to expand: what are the criteria do decide if something is a body part of someone?
    – rus9384
    Commented Jan 29, 2019 at 11:41