Are You For 86?

One of the comments I accidentally deleted claim that I am abusing the notion of force if I intend to call the use of RU486 to "terminate a pregnancy" force!

I suppose the commentor would object if I plan to bludgeon him to death with a club, but be okay if I plan to kill him with arsenic instead, since I will use "no force."

Of course, this is absurd: "force" in this context certainly doesn't have to mean visible force. If I invade your body with a chemical that disrupts its normal functioning, that is force. If I poison you with radiation, that is force.


  1. RU486, voluntarily ingested in the first trimester, affects no human being other than the ingester.

    You are trying to elide the key point. If the fetus is not a human being, not a person, then force against another person is NOT required to terminate the pregnancy, but force might be required to prevent a woman terminating. That is the claim you are trying to rebut.

    Your hypothetical above can be answered of course. Consider an abortifacient which does not invade the fetus but causes the woman's body to shed it.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fiat Currency

Central Planning Works!