I am a staunch believer in Selfownership.

Selfownership (or sovereignty of the individual, individual sovereignty or individual autonomy) is the concept of property in one’s own person, expressed as the moral or natural right of a person to have bodily integrity, and be the exclusive controller of his own body and life.

In a general sense the concept of rights means that an individual, and by extension all people in society are justified in rejecting force agent themselves or using force to defend themselves or others in certain circumstances from human rights violations, “self-ownership violations” meaning “the individual owns themselves and thus has rights to their body and what interacts with it or how it is use (self-governed body).” This is something that very few people would dispute, and thus the concept of human rights or self-ownership basically highlights the thinking connected to ones right to life as well as how that life is used. “Self-ownership” can thus be interpreted as meaning: we have individual body sovereignty, we have moral legitimacy to our rights in our bodies and our liberty s connected to this understanding, we are the only ones who (should) have control over ourselves, we are self-ownership agents on equal standing with every other self-ownership agent in society. Therefore, “Self-ownership” is the capacity to live wholly in accordance with the full and free exercise of our private judgment about and to our body. Ref

“Self-ownership” can be thought of as a person’s self-management and can thus be interpreted as supported under: Civil liberties “sovereignty of the individual”.

Civil liberties are personal guarantees and freedoms that the government cannot abridge, either by law or by judicial interpretation without due process. Though the scope of the term differs amongst various countries, some examples of civil liberties include the freedom from torture, freedom from forced disappearance, freedom of conscience, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, the right to security and liberty, freedom of speech, the right to privacy, the right to equal treatment under the law and due process, the right to a fair trial, and the right to life. Other civil liberties include the right to own property, the right to defend oneself, and the right to bodily integrity. In America we not only have Bill of Rights a collective name for amendments to the United States Constitution states have a constitution such as a bill of rights, or similar constitutional documents that enumerate and seek to guarantee civil liberties. Likewise, there is the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Ref

The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (abolished slavery and involuntary servitude) is sometimes viewed as an implementation of the concept of self-ownership, as are some portions of the Bill of Rights. Ref

“Self-ownership” can be thought of as involving a person’s bodily integrity which is the inviolability of the physical body and emphasizes the importance of personal autonomy and the self-determination of human beings over their own bodies. It considers the violation of bodily integrity as an unethical infringement. Ref

I will address the issues of abortion, genital mutilation, prostitution, drugs, and the right to die.

Abortion

The main argument of the anti-abortion or anti-choice movement boils down to this: a human zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus is a human being with a right to life, and abortion is therefore murder of a human being. Anti-choicers must claim that fetuses are human beings, of course, or they really have no case against abortion. However, the stages of embryonic development: A zygote is a single-celled fertilized egg. A blastocyst is the fertilized egg after cell division. At implantation, it becomes an embryo through to the eighth week of development, and a fetus from eight weeks to birth. The common law rule is that a fetus is not considered a living human being until it has been born alive. Therefore, if a defendant kills a pregnant woman he can only be charged with one count of murder for killing the mother, but no charges can be brought against him for the death of the fetus. Some jurisdictions have moved even farther than that and have defined murder as the unlawful killing of a human being or fetus with malice aforethought. Notice how human being and fetus are separate? That’s because a fetus is not a person. Ref Ref I think it’s the mother’s choice to decide what she wants to do with her body grin emoticon. If she wants to keep it ,let her keep it. If she wants to abort it, let her abort it. The word murder is a legal clarification on killing (someone who is a human ie born) unlawfully. I do think terminating a pregnancy by means of a kind of killing but so is the cow, pig and chicken I ate in the last two days. They are not murder and neither is abortion. Some say even a dead body has rights so a human zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus should two, however this is wrong and seems to misunderstands so called rights of the dead just as they seem to confuse what or who is owed human rights as a person.

The Rights of the Dead is more accurately stated the Rights of Survivors. In general, the legal rights of the next of kin include: the right to immediately possess the remains for burial, the right to oppose disinterment, the right to oppose autopsy or organ donation, and the right to seek damages for mutilation of the body. Who counts as next of kin? As a general matter, both common law and state statutes give first preference to spouses in determining what will happen to the deceased. If there is no spouse, decision-making authority goes by the same consanguinity rules that apply to inheritance. Legal disputes have arisen where same-sex partners or unmarried lovers are excluded from these decisions.

Well it’s not a viable being outside of the mother and as its not born its not yet a actually a citizen of anything. As in if the mother travles the baby could be born in a different state or country creating different issues.

A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Premature babies born at 22 weeks are more likely to survive outside the womb than previously thought, according to new research.

And 89-92% of all abortions happen during the first trimester, prior to the 13th week of gestation (AGI/CDC).
In 2012, 7.2% of all abortions occurred between 14-20 weeks’ gestation; 1.3% occurred ≥21 weeks’ gestation (CDC). Evidence regarding the capacity for fetal pain is limited but indicates that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester.” The third trimester begins at 27 to 28 weeks from conception.

So the fetus is not an aware sovereign being or citizen to suppress the rights of the who is both an aware sovereign being and a citizen with both human rights and government entidled citizen protection. Likewise, the fetus is being aborted before it can experience with the pain of death or some connected response to it. Ref

Genital Mutilation

I am pro-body sovereignty and rights against forced or nonconsent genital mutilation in females, males, as well as intersex persons. I am against the Genital Mutilation of All Children Girls and Boys. First for me as in all things: people own themselves, thus have all rights to their body to use as they wish. Children have the right to body sovereignty and bodily integrity rights that should not be violated, thus forced male and female circumcision is unethical. I am for the right to physical integrity. To read more on my thinking on this issue check out this link to my blog post: Against Genital Mutilation

 

Prostitution

I am for legal non forced consensual prostitution (for adults with adults). First for me as in all things: people own themselves, thus have all rights to their body to use as they wish. Also if prostitution were legalized, then it can also be regulated and made more safe. Applicable and newly created laws would make it safer and more healthy for both workers and clients. Prostitution is never going to go away, but we can make it safer for everyone involved.

In 1949, the United Nations adopted a resolution in favor of the decriminalization of prostitution, which has been ratified by fifty countries. The National Task Force on Prostitution suggests that over one million people in the US have worked as prostitutes. Estimates in some larger cities found that 20-30% of prostitutes are male. One report cites 60% of the abuse against street prostitutes perpetrated by clients, 20% by police, and 20% in domestic relationships.

In a study in London, 50% of clients were married or cohabiting. 70% of adult men have engaged in prostitution at least once. Average prostitution arrests include 70% females, 20% males and 10% customers. 85-90% of those arrested work on the street. Prostitution in the US is a 14.5 billion dollar a year business. Cities spend an average of 7.5 million dollars on prostitution control every year, ranging from 1 million dollars to 23 million dollars. Ref

Advocates for sex workers strongly back the idea. A petition in support of such a policy has garnered more than 6,000 signatures, including dozens from sex worker support and advocacy groups in Africa, Asia, Europe, North America and Latin America. The proposal has also received harsh criticism from anti-trafficking activists as well as from celebrities like Anne Hathaway, Lena Dunham and Kate Winslet. Ref

Amnesty International now joins the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, the World Health Organization and other global groups that argue the best way to protect the safety of people who sell sex is to legalize the industry. Ref

Some say but prostitution is only a result of economic necessity.

This claim that the only reason for prostitution is a result of economic necessity, well that if true would not make it different than all work as all work is an economic necessity, well I guess you could say unless there was something like a basic income. But even where there is a basic income we still see prostitution. Such as in Denmark where their ambassador once said, “while it is difficult to become very rich in Denmark no one is allowed to be poor. The minimum wage in Denmark is about twice that of the United States and people who are totally out of the labor market or unable to care for themselves have a basic income guarantee of about $100 per day.” And yet prostitution still happens in Denmark. But since sex work is not recognized as a lawful profession, sex workers are not entitled to the protection of employment laws or unemployment benefits, but are still required to pay tax. Ref

So let’s look at the research not believed claims.

Half of the prostitutes in a new survey say they became prostitutes because of sexual curiosity, and 68 percent consider their line of work as part of their sexuality.

“While there’s no doubt that money is the primary reason for the women becoming prostitutes, it is very surprising that sexual motivation ranks so highly,” says Jens Kofod, who holds a PhD in anthropology and is a researcher at SFI – The Danish National Centre for Social Research. Ref

Again, I am only for non-forced consensual prostitution (for adults with adults), that said I want to make it clear no one is obligated to give or engage in sex, not even in a relationship or marriage; but this includes the thinking behind the term ”friendzone.” To me the idea of ”friendzone” is or may be connected to some odd belief that people mostly women have an obligation to offer sex in return for friendly actions or thoughts. To such thinking I wish to remind people that NO one is required to be sexual with anyone regardless of how nice you are, how close you are as friends, on a date, or if you’re romantically together, etc. I always strive to respect the body ownership of others including their right to use sexual consent when, how and with whom they wish and there is no external entitlement nor obligation owed or owned by anyone else then the person themselves.

Drugs

I am for eliminating prohibition of all drugs for adults and establishing appropriate regulation and standards for distribution and use. First for me as in all things: people own themselves, thus have all rights to their body to use as they wish.

History has shown that drug prohibition reduces neither use nor abuse. After a rapist is arrested, there are fewer rapes. After a drug dealer is arrested, however, neither the supply nor the demand for drugs is seriously changed. The arrest merely creates a job opening for an endless stream of drug entrepreneurs who will take huge risks for the sake of the enormous profits created by prohibition. Prohibition costs taxpayers tens of billions of dollars every year, yet 40 years and some 40 million arrests later, drugs are cheaper, more potent and far more widely used than at the beginning of this futile crusade. Ref

10 Reasons to legalise all drugs

1 Address the real issues
2 Eliminate the criminal market place
3 Massively reduce crime
4 Drug users are a majority
5 Provide access to truthful information and education
6 Make all drug use safer
7 Restore our rights and responsibilities
8 Race and Drugs
9 Global Implications
10 Prohibition doesn’t work

To read the details for the ten reasons click the link: http://www.urban75.com/Drugs/drugten.html

The Right to Die

I am for the right to die, supporting ‘rational suicide’ assisted voluntary euthanasia. First for me as in all things: people own themselves, thus have all rights to their body to use as they wish.

The right to die is a moral principle based on the belief that a human being is entitled to commit suicide or to undergo voluntary euthanasia. Possession of this right is often understood to mean that a person with a terminal illness should be allowed to commit suicide or assisted suicide or to decline life-prolonging treatment, where a disease would otherwise prolong their suffering to an identical result. The question of who, if anyone, should be empowered to make these decisions is often central to debate.

Proponents typically associate the right to die with the idea that one’s body and one’s life are one’s own, to dispose of as one sees fit. However, a legitimate state interest in preventing irrational suicides is sometimes argued. Pilpel and Amsel write, “Contemporary proponents of ‘rational suicide’ or the ‘right to die’ usually demand by ‘rationality’ that the decision to kill oneself be both the autonomous choice of the agent (i.e., not due to the physician or the family pressuring them to ‘do the right thing’ and commit suicide). Ref

“All Art shown is by Damien Marie AtHope”