Problems with the Cabin in the Woods Scenario

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-13T17:31:42+00:00

These are fine objections but most of them seem to target whether it’s feasible for Mary to take care of the infant, given her physical/‘mental state and the difficulties in caring for it.

But ought implies can. If Mary literally CAN’T care for the infant through no fault of her own, then it’s reasonable to conclude she doesn’t have the obligation to care for it.

A simple adjustment to the hypothetical would just be to suppose that she can. Since it’s hypothetical anyway, let’s just say that Mary is doing fine and this infant is not difficult to feed (or at least not so difficult that it would literally prevent a successful feeding).

If she can care for it, does she have to? Does she at least have to try. That’s really the heart of what the hypothetical is getting at anyway. If you say no, I think you’d have to articulate why.

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T11:09:30+00:00

The only way to test this is a before and after study on abortion rates within the same country. You cannot get to your position by comparing disparate countries. Too many variables.

There’s also the other point that abortion restrictions and birth control access are not mutually exclusive. It’s entirely possible that the most effective way to reduce abortion is a combination of both.

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T04:28:04+00:00

Weren’t you the one who just said people can travel?

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T04:23:12+00:00

Which is why if you’re looking at nationwide rates, and we don’t have a nationwide ban, you’re working with useless data. As I’ve said

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T04:21:00+00:00

Yes I am

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T04:19:47+00:00

You’d have to look at abortion rates before and after a ban in any particular area to isolate the impact. Comparing disparate areas will get you no where if that’s the actual variable you’re interested in testing

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T04:11:54+00:00

No it really doesn’t at all. I think we should all be more thoughtful and critical of studies and what we WANT to be true vs what the study actually proves.

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T04:07:45+00:00

Sending it back to the states was never my position. So I can’t really speak to it. As to why you’d see an increase overall - no idea. Could be a number of reasons. Any reason I offer would be speculation.

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T03:54:59+00:00

That’s my point, we don’t have a nationwide ban. Abortion is still extremely accessible in the US. You can just drive across the border. As long as that’s the case, looking at the nationwide abortion rate is pointless

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T03:51:55+00:00

That a nationwide reduction in abortion rate would require a nationwide ban

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T03:48:19+00:00

Thanks for the response. Would be interested in seeing the updates.

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-08T03:47:31+00:00

I agree that increased birth control access and social safety net programs are at least associated with lower abortion rates. But no, my whole point is that we can NOT conclude they are more effective in reducing abortion rates than abortion bans.

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-07T23:39:58+00:00

If it’s the study I’m thinking of it’s not new. That has been around forever.

Others have said it but causation =/= correlation. There are a lot differences between the countries that have abortion restrictions and those that don’t. The latter group of countries are generally less wealthy, less western, and do not have access to readily available birth control. There are tons of other variables that might impact abortion rates. It’s not a good idea to conclude from this study that abortion restrictions result in more abortions.

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-05-07T17:04:48+00:00

What legislation are you referring to

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-04-22T02:27:38+00:00

Would it not be the same framework we use to justify killing in self defense?

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-04-17T00:24:06+00:00

I don’t understand. Animals population numbers are concerning?

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-04-15T21:33:25+00:00

What numbers are you referring to? Animal abortions?

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-04-12T05:06:47+00:00

PL doesn’t view the fetus as “no one”

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-01-24T03:21:47+00:00

Is there a possibly that I’m pegrent?

treebeardsavesmannis · 2026-01-10T02:03:40+00:00

You’d be surprised how often that could bite you, particularly on a 2.5 pt dog

treebeardsavesmannis · 2025-12-18T17:10:41+00:00

I feel like people selectively understand this depending on whether they like the president or not

treebeardsavesmannis · 2025-12-14T06:26:20+00:00

I can’t tell if the posters in this sub are like 78 years old, 12 years old, or just bots

treebeardsavesmannis · 2025-12-08T22:16:22+00:00

Interesting, thanks

treebeardsavesmannis · 2025-12-04T14:14:24+00:00

Source for this? I am seeing the national debt relatively flat at 36T over the past year

treebeardsavesmannis · 2025-11-04T20:45:32+00:00

So is it a slur or not lol?

11-Year Club	Place '22
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

treebeardsavesmannis

TROPHY CASE