News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade by dariusj18 on Friday June 24, 2022 @02:09PM (#31866852)
This is a contrived example, but a pretty obvious answer given PC's stance. You can enter into the contact and would need be prepared for civil liability upon breach, or criminal if you entered into the contract under false pretenses. Intent would be a major part of deciding the criminal action. If you could be shown to have the intent of someone's death, then that would be murder, otherwise no.
Re:Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade by Levitz on Friday June 24, 2022 @02:29PM (#31867226)
It is a contrived example, but it has a reason for it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion

Re:Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade by dariusj18 on Friday June 24, 2022 @04:25PM (#31868843)
Seems pretty heavily modified from the source, but even the source isn't super relevant because it is trying to use though experiments to determine the morality of the act, however Roe and this subsequent decision (tenuously) are based on legal justification.
Re:Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade by scarmig on Friday June 24, 2022 @04:57PM (#31869203)
Thought experiments are useful as intuition pumps, and very widely used in philosophy. And the particular argument I was responding to was about a moral argument for complete bodily autonomy.
Re:Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade by ModernMech on Saturday June 25, 2022 @01:46PM (#31877193)
As a violinist, I’m confused as to why the person is a violinist is relevant at all.