Abortion
Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.
Original Question
I think the current understanding of "my body, my choice" is misplaced. Pregnancy is not a choice, it is one of the possible consequences of choosing to have sex. "My body, my choice" should be applied to the choice of having sex.
What logical fallacies have I made in my reasoning?
Comments on Question
Answers
3Great question! It's a wonderful example illustrating the difference between an argument and a slogan.
As others have pointed out, it's a terrible argument, but I think it's a fantastic slogan. If I was a woman, I wouldn't want the state dictating whether I can have sex OR an abortion.
In this saying, the "choice" being referred to is not pregnancy; it is abortion. So there are no fallacies, just a misunderstanding.
The bigger picture: the "my body, my choice" may be a catchy chant at a rally, but a horrible argument. There are many things we do not get to choose just because they deal with our bodies. More specifically, there are so many exceptions to this "rule" that the rule itself is meaningless.
Anyone who is pro-choice would be far better off embracing a better argument.
The inferential fallacy is that the choice to have sex is the sole choice a woman can have. Assuming consensual sex, you are correct that pregnancy is a possible consequence. However, once she becomes pregnant, she can choose whether or not to abort. If the latter, she can choose whether or not to give the child up for adoption.
Master Logical Fallacies Online
Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.
View Online Course
As Dr Bo points out, "choice" here refers to the decision to get an abortion, rather than the decision to have sex.
You mention that getting pregnant isn't a choice - it's a consequence. That's right; it's the decision to carry on with the pregnancy that's the choice, and that's what pro-choice advocates are referring to.
You haven't committed any fallacies as far as I'm concerned; you're just mistaken about what pro-choice people argue for.
P) People should be able to decide what happens to their own bodies
P) Pregnancy is a matter concerning what happens to a woman's own body
C) A woman should be able to decide whether she gets an abortion
We can question the first premise (and it's probably this one you take issue with) - perhaps there are some things regarding people's own bodies that they shouldn't be able to do. For instance, should we allow people to self-harm?
We can question the second premise too - abortion is a matter concerning a woman's body, but also another 'body' - that of the foetus - and arguably, it deserves equal concern.
You could also object to the inference between the third premise and the conclusion - just because people have a normative right to decide what happens to their bodies, and just because pregnancy falls under 'what happens to your own body', does not imply abortion is moral; there may be other rights that need to be balanced against the right to bodily autonomy - e.g. the right to life of the unborn child.