RE: godless pro-lifers
October 14, 2013 at 8:16 pm
(This post was last modified: October 14, 2013 at 8:16 pm by Faith No More.)
(October 14, 2013 at 7:31 pm)whateverist Wrote: I would have thought the woman's womb was the only portion of either prospective parent which would directly bear the brunt of any government intrusion.
Maybe the only physical part of the parents, yes. But the man has an emotional stake in this, too, and if one believes the embryo to be a human, the embryo has more at stake than anyone.
(October 14, 2013 at 7:31 pm)whateverist Wrote: Of course the person who would be born if the woman decides to carry the unwanted pregnancy to term has a very great stake in her decision. I'm simply unwilling to tell the woman what she must do with her womb. I wouldn't envy her the predicament she is in. There are no good choices available if she has good reason not to want the baby. Let the poor woman at least have the final say.
So, what if a woman has a week left until her due date and she decides she doesn't want the kid inside her anymore? Would you support her right to terminate the pregnancy simply because it is her womb?
I'm not disagreeing with you on the issue, mind you. I just think saying that a woman's womb is hers to do with as she wishes isn't a valid argument, because society makes all kinds of intrusions into people's lives when human life is at stake. Also, it doesn't address the objections of those that believe an embryo to be a human being.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell