> We don't need to argue about whether it is in fact murder

That's exactly the problem: we do. Not here, specifically, but if someone's false beliefs have grown to the point that they are hurting others over them, they need to be stopped.

▲

Joker_vD a day ago | parent [-]

Do you not realize that this argument applies equally well both against pro-choice and against pro-lifers? It does, therefore it is entirely invalid and irrelevant.

Yes, those people with "false beliefs". Ah, if only we could force everyone to have true beliefs. And it's not against freedom of thought and consciousness, oh no! We're only against actually false beliefs. That, you know, have been proven wrong. Or at least for which the proofs of incorrectness exist that we believe are correct. But since our beliefs true, this is fine.

▲

lern_too_spel 18 hours ago | parent [-]

He said nothing about forcing. Suppose the false belief he was talking about was Creationism. Does his comment read as authoritarian?

▲

Joker_vD 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, it does.

▲

JoshTriplett 10 hours ago | parent [-]

It's fascinating that you are attempting to portray a comment as authoritarian that is arguing people should not enforce their false beliefs on others and should not restrict their bodily autonomy. It's literally an argument against being authoritarian.

	▲	bit-anarchist 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What I understood their point to be is that the only reason they are "false beliefs" is your own biases. If they aren't actual "false beliefs", then the restrictions on bodily autonomy are as justified as when dealing with killings, and your argument degenerates into pro-authoritarism.