New Clinton email controversy

[Edwardo Piet]

I think it's completely irrelevant whether it's part of the woman or not.

If so, then the argument that abortion should be permitted on the basis of a fetus being "her body" is also irrelevant. You cannot have it both ways.

I'm not making that argument. The mother has desires that ought not to be violated. The mind is what's important. Without conscious experience there's no experience of even physical pain.

Making a utilitarian argument with suffering as the sole criteria is problematic. If you apply that reasoning to cases other than abortion the flaw becomes immediately apparent. If suffering is the only criteria then it would be morally permissible for one person to benefit from causing the quick and painless death of another, regardless of age or circumstances.

No because that deprives the person of happiness that they are entitled to.

Secondly you have applied a double standard. For the fetus, you define suffering only in terms of physical pain and not loss of potential goods. But for the mother, you define suffering in terms of lost opportunities and/or incurring future obligations.

No I haven't I included the possibility of happiness for the fetus in my argument.