Pro-choice people: Can nursing mothers without access to formula kill newborns?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

This is not an argument made in good faith. Indeed it's an argument that no one is making. Withholding food to an infant is infanticide. It has nothing to do with 'bodily autonomy'.

I have talked to several pro choice friends of mine. A majority of them agree that if a woman does not have access to formula, she can not be forced to use her body to provide food for newborns.

I’m asking for consistency on bodily autonomy - what is the alternative to being FORCED to use their bodies if women can’t access formula?

At least in the context of the United States, and I would presume the rest of the developed world, this is an argument in bad faith for the simple reason that there is no lack of access to formula. One of the aspects of the WIC program is to provide formula free of charge to moms who either cannot or choose not to breastfeed but could not otherwise afford to do so.

Moreover, even if that were not the case, the alternative to giving the child up for adoption is clearly both readily available and morally superior to infanticide.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

At least in the context of the United States, and I would presume the rest of the developed world, this is an argument in bad faith for the simple reason that there is no lack of access to formula. One of the aspects of the WIC program is to provide formula free of charge to moms who either cannot or choose not to breastfeed but could not otherwise afford to do so.

Moreover, even if that were not the case, the alternative to giving the child up for adoption is clearly both readily available and morally superior to infanticide.

What sort of morality only works in the developed world?

Similarly, in most of the non-developed world, adoption programs take months to take children and many of them are covers for human trafficking. Hardly a serious alternative.

Compared to infanticide?  I think it's fairly obvious who's not being serious here.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Compared to infanticide?  I think it's fairly obvious who's not being serious here.

No, compared to breastfeeding.

You can't even parse your own analogy properly, how sad.  No wonder they no longer include analogies on the SAT; kids today never learn how to handle them. Here, let me help you.

Here is the analogy you are making,
carrying to term : abortion :: breastfeeding : infanticide

You're comparing abortion to infanticide and carrying to term with breastfeeding.

Of course, your analogy ignores the fact that with our current capabilities, the only  way to not carry a fetus to term is by abortion, whereas there are many alternative results to not breastfeeding a child other than infanticide and the use of formula.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You can't even parse your own analogy properly, how sad.  No wonder they no longer include analogies on the SAT; kids today never learn how to handle them. Here, let me help you.

Here is the analogy you are making,
carrying to term : abortion :: breastfeeding : infanticide

You're comparing abortion to infanticide and carrying to term with breastfeeding.

Of course, your analogy ignores the fact that with our current capabilities, the only  way to not carry a fetus to term is by abortion, whereas there are many alternative results to not breastfeeding a child other than infanticide and the use of formula.

My analogy, as a response to the violinist argument, is not absolutely practical in nature; nor is what it refutes. Theoretical morality, rather different from in practice.

Since you're basing your argument solely on theory and ignoring the real world, would it be safe to say you're either an economist or a sociologist? (Or even worse, a political scientist!!!!)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Since you're basing your argument solely on theory and ignoring the real world, would it be safe to say you're either an economist or a sociologist? (Or even worse, a political scientist!!!!)

Philosophy and debate, even with abortion, often revolves around theoretical questions.

Theory is necessary but definitely not sufficient.