RE: What is required for a human organism to be considered a rights bearer?
July 4, 2017 at 9:48 pm
(This post was last modified: July 4, 2017 at 9:52 pm by DogmaticDownSouth.)
(July 4, 2017 at 9:37 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote:(July 4, 2017 at 9:12 pm)DogmaticDownSouth Wrote: Therefor if an embryo or a fetus does not in your opinioin bear human rights then what is necessary to bear these rights and why?
If it does then this thread is not for you.
If there's any time before birth, I would have to say at the point that it can survive, without heroic measures, outside the womb.
Bodily autonomy trumps any rights before that point. Unless you want to argue that compulsory blood/tissue donations are also a good thing.
I would direct you to my other post : A secular arguement for the alteration of existing abortion law
Please give me feed back on that thread about the argument. Would like very much to hear your opinion.,
The question that I feel this begs, however if then if at anytime an organism cannot surive without assistance does it no longer bear human rights? If you are on a ventilator or having srugery and on a cardiopulmonary bypass machine you are no longer able to survive independently. Do you no longer bear human rights if you cannot survive independently?
Hope tone is not attacking, asking questions to further logical argument and get both of us to think about the implications of our thoughts and rationals. thanks for the honest reply
