Terms pertaining to your legal usage of Bob Simulator and it's related content, software, and assets, from TC Blox Studios. Bob Simulator License By playing or downloading Bob Simulator, you hereby agree to the following Bob Simulator License . If you have any questions, concerns, or inquiries, Contact Us . Below are the rules and terms relating to "Bob Simulator" which in this context refers to the video game called Bob Simulator and content related to it , created by TC Blox Studios. ----PAGE LAST UPDATED: 2026/06/07, YEAR/MONTH/DAY ---- --Rule #1: Usage Guidelines (Content you Create with our Game)-- Bob Simulator and all of it's embedded software, code, and media, is under the ownership of TC Blox Studios. You are not allowed to use Bob Simulator to spread viruses or malware to other users through the in-game Multiplayer. There are no limitations or regulations on what content you create with Bob Simulator. We ask that you not create content and creations that spread hateful messages and prejudice, or illegal activity, but it is not our responsibility. We take no responsibility for what you create with Bob Simulator. The creations, builds, structures, maps, worlds, mods, addons, servers, skins, playermodels, texture packs, machinimas, showcases, fan-art, online videos, transformative media, and other works you create are under your full ownership if said works are transformative, unique, and creative in some way. If they are, they are what we label as "Creative Works". For example, spawning in a single prop and giving it a random color would not be considered a creative work. Spawning in a single prop, giving it a color, giving it a display name, and spawning in a second prop and gluing it to the first, would be considered a creative work. Placing a bunch of props, resizing some of them, assigning them very specific colors, and arranging them in certain ways to build a large structure like a castle, or intricately designing a texture pack, intricate creative terrain modification, or other such art-pieces, especially if they make use of textures or other assets you own, would be considered creative works. Machinimas, custom playermodels especially if they use custom textures, addons, servers, mods, are considered creative works if they are transformative, unique, and creative. You may also convert or otherwise export creations made in Bob Simulator to actual 3D Models, or translate saved chunk data to recreate custom and creative terrain modifications, to use elsewhere. Slap your own custom textures on that and you got yourself a creative work! When it comes to distribution of game software it's embedded assets, plagiarism is bad, but redistributing software explicitly for archival purposes with credit to TC Blox Studios and TonyTCB is okay. Do not abuse 'archiving' to get away with plagiarism though. There are no all-out restrictions given by this license on what kinds of creative works you can create. You can create whatever you want. We do not claim ownership, responsibility, or liability over any creative works created by you or another third-party. You are allowed to redistribute, monetize, sell, and merchandise your creative works. (Summary: You own the transformative creations you make with and about Bob Simulator, and can monetize them freely.) --Rule #2: Online Media Guidelines (Online Videos, Showcases, and Machinimas)-- -Transformative Works, Let's Plays, and Machinimas- You may create and distribute Online Videos, Machinimas, Let's Plays, and Showcases that involve videos, images, screenshots, fan-art, and other types of media that represents Bob Simulator freely, as long as you meet the following criteria. If you do not meet the criteria, you must get permission from TC Blox Studios: 1. You are not affiliated with and acting on behalf of a governmental agency or entity that is spreading hateful messages, prejudice, defamatory accusations, or engaging in activity that violates human rights. 2. You are not affiliated with and acting on behalf of a corporation, organization, or company worth more than $1,000,000 USD and also creating media under the pretense of advertising, promotional material, or otherwise dishonest matters. 3. You are not affiliated with and acting on behalf of a political campaigning group spreading misinformation and/or ideas, claims, accusations, and justifications based on statistically false, prejudiced, or defamatory grounds. 4. You are not acting on behalf of a news agency that is using our Content to spread hateful messages, prejudice, or defamatory accusations. If you do not meet this criteria, you must obtain legitimate permission from TC Blox Studios to proceed. (send us a support ticket) Do not abuse our leniency towards online media in an attempt to spread harmful or dishonest messages, or for unfair promotion. You may create transformative works of art, such as YouTube videos, and let's play videos, or other forms of media featuring video or image media of Bob Simulator. If your creative work involves the direct distribution of large portions of our copyrighted material, it must be transformative and not contain a significant portion of our copyrighted material present in our Content or otherwise. (Summary: You may create and distribute online videos and showcases as an individual freely.) --Rule #3: Servers, Fan-made Merch, Monetization, and Fan-art-- This sub-section applies to Bob Simulator Servers created, hosted, and played on. You are allowed to create and monetize Servers for Bob Simulator freely as long as you do not do the following: 1. Use Bob Simulator Servers to spread computer viruses, malware, or other malicious computer code involuntarily. (you are allowed to test these things in a small group with people who consent to it, but don't try to trick people) 2. Use Servers to spread or facilitate scams, or spam. (you are allowed to sell stuff on hosted Servers, including virtual currencies, donation rewards, ranks, merchandise, fan-art, skins, and whatever else is applicable, but you must sell them in an honest way that does not facilitate a scam) You are allowed to create Fan-made content, specifically Fan-art and Merchandise that is inspired by Bob Simulator. You are allowed to create Fan-made content and Fan-art that uses transformative representations of Bob Simulator images. You may monetize your Fan-art and Merchandise freely, with no limitations on monetization as long as it isn't defamatory, discriminatory, or constitutes a scam. There are no all-out restrictions given by this license on what kinds of Fan-made content you create. You can create whatever you want. You are allowed to use any music present in Bob Simulator freely on the internet non-commercially, with credit; and you are allowed to use it in your own Fan-made content and in your own Machinimas, Let's Play Videos, YouTube Videos, and Showcases. All music in Bob Simulator can be used in accordance with the Fair-Use 2024 License . You are allowed to use the Bobbelfont , the font used in Bob Simulator, freely for non-commercial purposes. (Summary: You can make Music, Fan-art, Merch, host Servers, and sell stuff on Servers freely; but don't scam or spread malware) --Rule #4: Mods, Addons, and Plugins-- You are allowed and encouraged to create Addons/Mods/Plugins for Bob Simulator, and these Addons/Mods/Plugins can be distributed if they do not contain a significant portion of Bob Simulator's assets. You are allowed to freely distribute Addons/Mods/Plugins made to be compatible with Bob Simulator yet do not portions of Bob Simulator, completely freely and even commercially. If Addons/Mods/Plugins contain a significant portion of Bob Simulator assets, they must be distributed for free and credit to TC Blox Studios must be provided both in the download if it is downloadable, and on the website or other media the Addons/Mods/Plugins are distributed on. When it comes to larger projects by TC Blox Studios, like projects comprising more than just a few images, audio files, video files, etc, actions constituting plagiarism such as redistribution of a significant portion of the Content, as well as 'free-booting', is not allowed unless it's explicitly for archival purposes and credit to TC Blox Studios is given. (you can sell mods as much as you want as long as they dont contain significant portions of our Content) You are allowed to sell Addons/Mods/Plugins made to be compatible with our Content. We do not regulate or put limitations on what kinds of Addons/Mods/Plugins are made for our Content, unless it is an attempt at illegal activity, scams, malware, etc. There are no all-out restrictions given by this license on what kinds of Addons/Mods/Plugins you create. You can create whatever you want. (Summary: You can make and distribute Mods for Bob Simulator freely as well as commercially, though do not plagiarize.) --Rule #5: Terms Changes -- We recommend you check the Bob Simulator License terms for any updates whenever you download copies of Bob Simulator from our website. Changes made to the license will NOT apply retroactively to copies of Bob Simulator already present on devices. Those copies of the game will continue to be held by the same license that was active at the time they were created, unless you want the new license to apply instead of the old one. You may choose which license you want to follow. If those copies were redistributed for any reason, the copies of copies are to be held by the updated license. Multiplayer servers and content will be held by the updated license at all times, though no limitations on server content shall apply.

Members

A funny embedded site created by TC Blox Studios that is basically Garry's Mod News (yes really) Back to Site This is a Legacy Version of TC-BLOX.NET. Links and Information may be outdated and parts of the site may not work.

Skins for Minecraft, available for download Minecraft Skins (we are not affiliated with Mojang Studios or Microsoft ) Java + Bedrock Nasal Jim Funny guy with a nose (the best skin, clearly) Download Java + Bedrock Cyclops Guy One eyed funny guy Download Java + Bedrock Cookie Person A person made of Cookies Download Java + Bedrock Red Alien 6-Eyed Alien who is Red Download Java + Bedrock Blue Alien 6-Eyed Alien who is Blue Download Java + Bedrock Dot Blob Blob of Dots, likes Tic Tac Toe Download Java + Bedrock Essence of Apple Made of Apples Download Java + Bedrock Green/Blue Blob Gradient of Blue and Green with White Eyes Download Java + Bedrock Spiralette Related to the Dot Blob but weirder Download Apply for Partnership and help Contribute

A funny embedded site created by TC Blox Studios that is basically Garry's Mod News (yes really) Back to Site This is a Legacy Version of TC-BLOX.NET. Links and Information may be outdated and parts of the site may not work.

The terms pertaining to your legal use of our Open-Source and Free-To-Use Content from TC Blox Studios. Open-Source 2024 License By downloading or otherwise using Open-Source Content and "Free-To-Use" Content available on our website, you hereby agree to the Open-Source 2024 License Below are the rules and terms relating to "Free-Co ntent" which in this context refers t o anything available on this website marked as subject to the Open-Source 2024 License and/or labeled as "Open-Source" and/or labeled as "Free and Open-Source". Assets are subject to the Asset License . (Anything available on this website that is also subject to this license is referred to in this license as "Free-Content") ----CREATION OF THE OPEN-SOURCE 2024 LICENSE: 2024/8/10, YEAR/MONTH/DAY ---- --Rule #1: Attribution-- You may use all Free-Content and use them in your own content, projects, and commercial products, as long as you give credit to TC Blox Studios for their use, in the projects/media you use them in. This can include the inclusion of a link to https://www.tc-blox.net in the description of a YouTube video, or the inclusion of a link to https://www.tc-blox.net in the projects/media our Free-Content is used in. Along with the link to the website, you must also include the name of the brand, "TC Blox Studios", in the credits. There are no restrictions given by this license on what kinds of creative works you use Free-Content in. You can create whatever you want. (Summary: If you use Free-Content in your own projects, even commercial, you must credit TC Blox Studios with a link to us in said project.) --Rule #2: Redistribution and Modification-- You are allowed to download and include our Free-Content in your own commercial projects, of any kind. You are also allowed to redistribute any of the Free-Content from our website on their own, however Free-Content must only be redistributed for free, and you must include proper attribution and a link to https://www.tc-blox.net You are also allowed to modify our Free-Content in any way you wish, and redistribute modifications to our Free-Content. Modifications must be redistributed for free if they contain a substantial portion of the original Free-Content. However, if you redistribute modified Free-Content you must also credit TC Blox Studios as explained in Rul e #1. (Summary: You are allowed to redistribute any Free-Content for free, on their own, if you give credit.) --Rule #3: Derivative Works-- You are allowed to create derivative works based on Free-Content, and you may have copyright ownership over the works if they do not contain a substantial portion of Free-Content. If they do contain a substantial portion, you may have copyright ownership over all parts of the derivative work that were not created or owned by TC Blox Studios. (anything you made yourself) But, if the derivative work contains a substantial portion of our Free-Content, you must include a link to TC Blox Studios as explained in Rule #1. You may also sell derivative works, as long as they add a substantial amount to the Free-Content they are based on. If they do not add a substantial amount, or if they are basically equivalent to a small mod for Free-Content, then you must redistribute it for free. (basically, don't abuse the license to try and sell our Free-Content by editing it slightly) There are no all-out restrictions given by this license on what kinds of derivative works you create. You can create whatever you want. --Rule # 4: Terms Changes -- This license shall not be changed, and any Free-Content held to this license will remain under no other limitations other than the Open-Source 2024 License.

See the Demo Projects we have available for online play Topple The Tower (Legacy) Topple The Tower (Legacy) is free and Open-Source under the Open-Source 2023 License . - Download Demo as .zip - ToppleTheTower Legacy: The first gamedev project I made using the Unity Engine I plan on making a remastered version of this game in the future View Game on Itch.io Keybinds: WASD to move, W rolls you forward, S rolls you back, A and D strafe roll you left and right R to go back to the Main Menu T to swap between Third Person and First Person (in the downloadable version, which is an older version; perspectives are changeable in the menu) Known Issues and Bugs: Camera movement in first person is only on one axis Camera movement in first person is jittery Shadow render length is too short Texture and UI resolutions are too lacking Textures are missing from props Downloadable version forces you to go back to menu to change perspectives (these issues will be fixed in the remastered version, see development activity for more information)

An Open-Source Voice Chat App created by jimmybob / TonyTCB Bobbelvox Bobbelvox is free and Open-Source under the copyleft Open-Source 2024 License . - Download app as .zip for Windows - - Download as .zip for Linux (x86_64 / x86_32) - - Download as .zip for Linux (arm64 / arm32) - - Download as .zip for Web (html) - The program's source code as Godot Project Files are available: - Download Project Files (Source Code) as .zip - Bobbelvox is a free and open-source Voice Chat program for Windows and Linux. You can use it to host voice calls. The code of Bobbelvox is reused in Bob Simulator for the Voice Chat feature. BobbelVox is an Open-Source Voice Chat Software created by jimmybob / TonyTCB using the Open-Source Godot Engine. BobbelVox was created by TC Blox Studios, you can see more at https://www.tc-blox.net BobbelVox is licensed under the TC Blox Studios Open-Source 2024 License: https://www.tc-blox.net/legal/opensource-2024-license It is recommended, for sensitive conversations, to use Bobbelvox with people within your own Wifi Network, for security reasons. As of v1.2.7, voice calls are not encrypted on their own. Usage of the Bobbelfont is licensed under the SIL Open Font License. You can view these licenses at: https://openfontlicense.org/open-font-license-official-text/ https://www.tc-blox.net/legal/opensource-2024-license BobbelVox's Source Code and provided Project Files are licensed under the TC Blox Studios Open-Source 2024 License. Resources part of the Godot Engine are licensed under the MIT License: https://godotengine.org/license/ Please give credit to jimmybob / TonyTCB and TC Blox Studios for use of BobbelVox assets and project files.

Mods for Minecraft: Java Edition, available for download Minecraft Mods (we are not affiliated with Mojang Studios or Microsoft ) Java Edition 1.14.4 Deep Forest Mod A deep forest dimension, accessible using a creative-mode portal igniter Download Java Edition 1.14.4 Purple Planet A purple planet dimension, with rocks of redstone ore. Download Java Edition 1.16.5 MiniCity Release (1.16.5) As seen on YouTube! Adds Miniature City Blocks, Roads, and more. Watch the Video on the Mod Download Java Edition 1.14.4 Debug Dimensions Adds 3 debug dimensions for testing, accessible using the Dimensional Remote in creative-mode. Download Java Edition 1.14.4 Chemicals/Potions + More Potions and Chemicals of varying mixed effects. A few exclusive effects with unique attributes! Download Java Edition 1.14.4 Villager Pillager Dimensions Adds Themed Dimensions for Villagers, of emeralds, and Pillagers, with dangerous mob spawns. Download Java Edition 1.14.4 Nexis World Adds the Nexis Dimension Download Apply for Partnership and help Contribute

Page Not Found Error 404 This page doesn't exist! Browse Assets Browse Projects Browse Videos Our Contributors Help Center Search Site

Page Not Found Error 404 This page doesn't exist! Browse Assets Browse Projects Browse Videos Our Contributors Help Center Search Site

Abortion Ethics Back to Home Details Yoggism Guide Philosophy Menu More Solving The Ethics of Abortion [Full Text] —The Ethics of Abortion— Abortion is the termination of pregnancy, the killing and removal of reproductive tissue, i.e. a developing fetus or embryo within a uterus, to end a pregnancy. Abortion can be performed in different ways and at different stages in a pregnancy. During the first few stages of pregnancy, most commonly the pills mifepristone, misoprostol are used to induce a miscarriage and medical abortion, by causing the fetus or embryo to detach from the uterus. During middle and later stages of pregnancy, the dilation and evacuation methods are often used, the fetus is removed via suction and other specialized instruments, sometimes special forceps are used to remove the fetus in multiple pieces rather than all at once, along with the placenta and other tissue. Sometimes instead, medications can be given to cause the uterus to contract and expel the pregnancy, somewhat like inducing labor. Abortions in a well-regulated medical setting are usually very safe for the mother, almost all abortions are done during much earlier stages of pregnancy, later-term abortions are typically done to protect the life of the mother or as the result of serious and fatal birth defects. —Pro-Life Arguments based on Semantics— Some condemn these various practices as murder, there are various arguments in favor of this position. The first one is that a fetus or developing embryo is 'human' because it will develop into a human baby, not an elephant or pig or anything else. Therefore, abortion is the killing of human life, which is definitionally murder. Another argument is that humans have human rights, thus the fetus as being human, must inherit the same rights. Another is that after the moment an egg is fertilized in the womb, it gains unique DNA which makes it a unique human individual, thus inheriting certain rights. The problem with these arguments against abortion is they use the word "human" incorrectly. A pile of skin cells is human, a cancerous tumor is human and has unique DNA to an extent, conjoined twins have the same DNA but are different people. Being human and being "a human" are two different things. When someone says something is "a human", linguistically this implicitly refers to a person, which is why saying "all humans have human rights" is intuitively true. As such, to say something being human makes it a human is begging the question, you are assuming the fetus has personhood or qualifies as a human being with rights, before you even start talking. "Human being" is another flawed term, used most of the time NOT to mean "any human organism that is alive" but rather a person that is human, or a living, sentient organism that belongs to the human species. If someone already does not accept that any organism with human DNA is automatically a person deserving of rights, these arguments will not suffice. —The Pro-Life Argument of Potential— Besides relying on semantics to give an intuitive point, some pro-life arguments focus on the potential of the fetus to becoming a person in the future. The argument is roughly, imagine you're baking a cake. You get all the ingredients together, mix it, and put it in the oven. Someone comes by, opens the oven, and smashes the dough with their boot. You say, "You destroyed my cake!". They respond, "It wasn't a cake yet!". You then respond "Maybe, but it was gonna be!". The point is clear. The cake-in-progress, if left alone in the oven, would become an actual fully-fledged cake, to destroy it prevents that cake from actualizing. To kill a fetus then is to prevent that future person from ever coming to be. What if someone went back in time and gave your mother an abortion? Would that not be your demise? To kill someone at all, is bad because it deprives them of their future experiences. To kill a fetus deprives a future person of their experiences. If the fetus isn't sentient yet, the future person is deprived of ALL of their experiences, this could imply that it is grossly worse than killing an already sentient fetus, or even a newborn baby, at least by this logic. This reasoning would imply abortion is horrendously bad. —Sentience and The Coma Patient— One of the key arguments in favor of the position that abortion is ethically permissible, is that if the fetus is not sentient yet then there is no personhood because there is no preference at all, so nobody is actually being harmed or can be said to be losing out as a result of the abortion. This would imply abortion before the fetus is sentient is, in an ideal case, ethically equivalent to choosing not to conceive in the first place. The pro-life argument against this position is the coma patient example. Imagine a person stuck in a coma, not sentient, they are instead stuck in a dreamless sleep. They have a chance of waking up in a month. Is it ethically permissible to kill them before they wake up? The intuitive answer is no, and indeed they were referred to as a person at the outset, but if they are not sentient right now then there is no preference, nobody is being harmed. Therefore the pro-life person argues that the pro-choice position is wrong, because it denies coma patients a right to life and justifies murder of people in a dreamless sleep. —The Rock Machine Dilemma - Why Potential leads to Absurdity— There is a massive problem with this argument against the pro-choice position, however. Imagine a machine that can turn rocks into people and people into rocks. When a person becomes a rock they enter a dreamless sleep, not conscious at all. If the rock gets turned back into a person, they are the same person they were before. Clearly, if someone is turned into a rock and the rock then broken into bits, that is murder. The person has lost consciousness and can no longer be revived. If a rock is turned into a person and then back into a rock again, and then broken to bits, this is again murder because they were a person and then lost consciousness only to never come back. The question is this, what if a rock that has never been a person is broken into bits? Does the mere existence and usability of this machine somehow imply ordinary rocks have moral value? Does it imply it is unethical or murderous to destroy a rock that has never had sentience before? The pro-life position of potentiality implies the answer is yes, as the rock has the potential to become a person and by destroying it that person never comes to be and "is deprived of their future experiences". The obvious problem with this is that it is absurd, how can someone who never existed in any way be deprived of anything? Well, how can they? Not only does this dilemma break the potentiality argument, it also solves the coma patient argument. A coma patient being killed before they can wake up is analogous to a rock that used to be a person being destroyed, it is murder because you are preventing that person from ever coming back into existence as a conscious, sentient person. —The Asymmetry of Creating vs. Depriving— Before the 20th week of pregnancy, at least before the 18th week, modern science as of the year 2026 (12,026 Holocene Calendar), suggests that such fetuses are not sentient. The above examples and intuition that it is not wrong to not conceive, show an asymmetry between creating and not creating new beings, and depriving existing beings of experiences. To create new beings is fine, to not create new beings is neutral and not a deprivation. To deprive existing beings of things is bad. To take a being and make it not a being anymore, and then make it so its being-hood (or personhood) can never be brought back, is bad. Thus similar to the rock example, to kill a non-sentient fetus is not murder because the potential of it to become a future person, doesn't actually matter for the same reason the rocks that were never persons, don't suddenly gain value just because it became possible to turn them into people. This can be true while it is also true that it is wrong to kill a coma patient even if they are not currently sentient, because doing so prevents that person from ever being brought back. —Gradual Rock Machine— One objection to the rock machine dilemma is to say that it is not analogous to pregnancy, because the machine acts on a binary. The rock goes from not sentient at all, to an entirely sentient person. This is a fair criticism, the real point of the dilemma is to show that potential alone does not suffice for an ethical claim against someone. Let us imagine instead, a machine that you can load a rock in, and have it slowly be transformed into a person over the course of 9 months. Let's also assume that in the first 3 months at least, the rock stays non-sentient. In this scenario, there is no actual reason to say that potential comes into play. To destroy a rock in the first 3 months still does nothing to anyone, and it isn't meaningfully different from just breaking a rock next to a river that hasn't started the transformation at all. What about destroying a rock one day into the transformation? What about one hour? There is no measure whatsoever of the difference. What if the rock in the original problem is sitting on a conveyor belt slowly moving to the machine that will turn it into a person? Does this suddenly make that specific rock but no other, unethical to break or even remove from the belt? It also leads to another absurd conclusion. Imagine for the sake of argument that we figure out how to engineer a sentient robot, a robot that when the appropriate parts are manufactured and added to its body it gains consciousness. You have the blueprint to this machine, you begin building it. You're a few days away from adding the necessary parts to give it consciousness when you change your mind and decide to stop building it. Is that murder? Is this unethical to stop half way through, even if the robot never gained consciousness? This would seem to imply a regular toaster could be unethical to break because it "could be made sentient with a few extra parts". This is nonsense. —"Every Sperm is Sacred"— One possible argument against a lot of this is that fetal sentience is a gradual process, that consciousness is on a spectrum and a fetus before even 18 weeks may still have some very low form of subjective experience. The problem with this insistence is that any subjective experience would toil in compare to the extremely complex consciousness, emotion, thoughts and feelings, and preferences, of a pig, goat, sheep, camel, alligator, or any other developed animal. As explained already, potential alone need not suffice for an argument here. To say a fetus is valuable because it has potential AND it is already to some extent sentient, thus it is being deprived of future experiences, runs into yet another even worse problem. Why must conception be the start of this experience? Egg and sperm cells are both already alive, and a sperm cell on route to an already alive egg cell moving into position is a scenario where both egg and sperm are both alive and have the potential to develop into a person. Just as an already developing fetus in the womb may not be sentient but still alive and perhaps have some low level of experience, though unproven, has potential. Therefore the logical implication is the "every sperm is sacred" absurdity, and as an easy strongman of this argument, if a sperm cell is on route to an egg cell and an implanted IUD, a birth control device, blocks it, that is then murder. If a blastocyst is prevented from implanting into the uterine wall that is also murder. To use a condom during intercourse is also murder for similar reasons. Not all sperm have the potential, only a small few can succeed, but if those few have a definite potential and are stopped, that is thus murder. This is clearly another absurdity, and it implies that a machine that can turn plants into people makes all plants everywhere suddenly have rights. This is again nonsense. —The Yoggist's Solution— Under Yoggism, interests can only be frustrated if they exist or have existed, or are guaranteed to exist. For someone to poison their fetus with the intention of eventually giving birth to a child with a defect, the act of poisoning the fetus does indeed frustrate the interests of the future child. This is true even though the fetus itself may not have value nor interests. To kill a non-sentient fetus though, may be ethically neutral, as there are no interests present or future being frustrated, as the future child never comes to be in the first place. Similarly with the rock examples, the same logic works well. A rock does not have interests and thus has no value intrinsic to it, but if a rock used to be a person then destroying the rock frustrates the interests of that person because it prevents them from ever being revived. If a rock has the potential to become a person in the future though, it frustrates no actual interests to destroy the rock. To instead slightly damage the rock, and then turn it into a person though, would be to frustrate the interests of the resulting person if the person suffers as a result of the damage to the rock. As such, our asymmetry from earlier stands strong under Yoggism, to create new beings is fine but not an obligation, to deprive existing beings is a frustration of their interests. To start building a robot with the potential to gain consciousness once a few extra parts are added, and then change your mind, is also not murder for the same reasons. As such, we conclude from all sides including Yoggism, that abortion before the 20th week, and certainly before the 18th week, should be ethically permissible. —Bodily Autonomy— Under Yoggism, Justification Ethics dictates actions that effect interests have a justificatory burden. To resolve a given conflict, you identify the actor and non-actor or active party and passive party. This distinction of action and inaction then allows you to apply the justificatory standard to the actor, to check if it violates the Anti-Abuse Principle, that being whether the actions are intrinsically frustrating to the other party's interests. The question is, what happens if abortion is performed against a fetus that is already sentient? This is more clearly the killing of a human being, of a person, but it is also a bodily autonomy problem because forcefully restricting such abortion prevents someone from acting on their own body and from stopping oneself from giving their nutrients to someone else without their consent. The question here is who began the conflict? Because whoever did not begin the conflict has the right to defend themselves from it. The clear answer here is that a non-sentient fetus could not have began a conflict, could not have acted against a mother because it is not a moral agent, normative claims cannot be prescribed relative to it at all. But, an already sentient fetus is initiating conflict against the mother, by taking and using her nutrients without consent in the even where the mother wants the abortion. In the event where the mother does not want the abortion and someone forces it on her, that would just be murderous. For the mother to instead have an abortion in a later term, on her own accord, is for her to refuse to give nutrients to another being. The fetus intrinsically frustrated her interests by taking nutrients, the mother is merely stopping that. —A Conclusion of Evictionism— Two questions remain. One, how can the mother have a right over her nutrients if the sentient fetus or baby is not her body? Two, what counts as proportionate defense? The answer to the first question is simple. The fetus is not her body but is taking nutrients from her body without her consent. The fetus not knowing what it is doing does not matter for any self-defense claim because bodily autonomy under Yoggism simply has nothing to do with intention and everything to do with what is necessary to prevent frustration of inherent interests over your own body. The mother thus should have the right to, at any time, revoke permission and capacity to take her nutrients, by whatever means is necessary to protect that right. The answer to the second question is where the problem starts. If the fetus is the initiator of the conflict, the one who begins acting, taking nutrients, and the mother is merely defending her right over those nutrients, the question is what counts as proportionate defense. The real answer is essentially, philosophical evictionism, the idea that abortion may be permissible in later stages but only if necessary to remove it; in later stages at least, the fetus ought be removed in the least-lethal way possible. —The Conclusion on Abortion— Therefore, abortion is ethically permissible before the 20th week or at least the 18th week, for any reason by any means necessary to remove the fetus, and if the fetus truly is not sentient then the manner of removal is ethically irrelevant as long as the person getting the abortion consents to it. Later-term abortions are only ethical if they are performed in a manner necessary to safely remove the fetus, in the least-lethal way possible assuming the fetus is sentient, and if the person getting the abortion does not consent to the operation then it is murderous and unethical.