"I don't believe in "life saving" killing. Nor does she."
It is referred to as self-defense, JM.
You would, irl, refuse your daughter a life saving abortion as self-defense. That is definitely your right because nobody's removed women's civil rights to personal privacy and bodily autonomy.
If Roe v Wade were to be overturned, out the window those go. Then, perhaps (worst case scenario), the physician would force an abortion on your daughter or on her daughter.
There're more than one side to this debate. But you're so focused on the fetus, you've lost sight of everything else.
I, for one, would hope your daughter, Guppy's daughter, my daughter, you, me, and she were all covered by civil rights of privacy and autonomy so that, individually, we could make the right decisions for our individual circumstances.
Don't you agree? Yes or No?
AC/PL prefers to start their argument at viability (one day before the due date) and work backward, making the moral arguement that terminating a baby is wrong.<quoted text> Katie, deliberately killing an innocent humans life is never the "right decision" . Not for me, my daughter, you, your daughter, guppy etc.....
Women kill their unwanted born children instead of giving them to the father to raise or some family member. For some sickass reason they think killing them is the best decision.
Where is the line drawn? What makes it acceptable killing seconds prior to birth but not after? Who's justified? Who isn't. All personal opinions really. In the end, an innocent life is deliberately killed. You don't have a moral right to do so.
PC prefer to start our argument at fertilization and work toward viability, making the legal argument that there is not a baby to terminate and therefore the one person involved (the woman) is also the only person who can make any medical decisions regarding her body.
There are very few PC who do not agree with restrictions.
There are very few AC/PL who do not agree with exceptions.
For many on the AC side, they cannot understand why anyone would not want to afford a fetus that is one day from delivery legal protection from the actions of the woman. No manslaugher charge. No murder charge. Because the fetus has no rights.
I don't know of any PC person who could MORALLY accept terminating a viable fetus, one day before delivery (healthy woman, no medical emergency, etc.).
As for the PC side, we cannot understand how anyone would consider a fertilized egg as being an infant. Under the worst of circumstances (life-threatening pregnancy), the woman should have the legal right to make her own medical decisions, so it follows that under the best of circumstances (early in the pregnancy, no life-threat), it follows that the woman should have the legal right to make her own medical decisions.
As Katie inferred, the lost point in all this is the zef is INSIDE a person. No one is arguing the woman is not a person, a person with civil rights, a person who is supposed to have equal civil rights to any other citizen/person in the US.
There is simply no way to afford a fetus rights without diminishing the pregnant woman's rights.
AC/PL are all too willing to accept this concept and make it law. They do not consider that their would-be law disregards medical opinion on a case by case basis. No matter what, gotta follow the law, and the woman doesn't get a say as to what happens to her body.
PC cannot accept this concept, not only because we will not relinquish personal autonomy, medical privacy, but because we also know a "one size fits all" law is not feasable. It can't fit all.