Attack at Planned Parenthood Clinic

[Tiberius]

I know you weren't, I was restating your argument in that way to show why one should not depend on the naturalistic fallacy as justification for one's position.  I was not intending to insinuate that you somehow supported or condoned rape, I know you don't. I was intending to show how that kind of argument (using the naturalistic fallacy), with only a few changes of words, can be used to justify both what people consider a moral position or behavior (a pro-life stance) and what people consider an immoral position or behavior (something like rape) in the same way I used it before (see the post with the Mr. Bean pic).

The problem with the whole "penis is supposed to go in the vagina, therefore the penis has a right to be in the vagina" is that it doesn't even remotely compare with the example of the fetus having a right to be in the vagina. Firstly, because the penis itself isn't an entire living being, just part of one, so it doesn't have rights anyway. Secondly (and more importantly), although the penis is supposed to go in the vagina, it not being in the vagina doesn't deny someone the right to life, as removing a fetus from the vagina does.

Finally, even if we were to somehow come up with a valid logical argument that men have a right to put their penis into vaginas, we have to deal with the conflict in rights. On the one hand, we have the (assumed for sake of the argument) right of the man to put their penis into the woman's vagina, and on the other hand, we have the right of the woman to do what she wants with her own body (within reason), which includes preventing the man from putting his penis into her vagina.

To sort out the conflict, we have to balance the rights and determine which is right is more important (as I did with the fetus issue). One could successfully argue that the right of the man to put his penis into the woman's vagina is far less important than the right of the woman to prevent the man from doing so, especially considering the possible outcomes. The worst outcome for the man is that he doesn't get to have sex...not a particularly bad outcome (undesirable for him, but there are plenty of women who may want his penis in their vagina, so it's ultimately not a huge violation of his "right"). The worst outcome for the woman is that she feels violated, is potentially injured, and could have an unwanted pregnancy. It's obvious to me at least that the right of the woman is more important in this situation.