(July 20, 2014 at 3:31 pm)Esquilax Wrote:No, but that's a different situation. Actually a parent can be forced to risk his life for a child - The case of a kid drowning, if you know how to swim you are legally obligated to TRY to save your child, or else you'll be accused of murder on the form of omission (not doing anything). So yeah, a parent is kinda forced to take risks, but the organ case is true, a parent can't be forced. However the situation of hooking someone up is something that comes after and implies a number of risks, a regular pregnancy with no significant risks is not endangering life and only occupies the body for 9 months. This is what would happen if a fetus was a person, but they aren't anyway, and the reason they shouldn't be is because it would arise the problem I mentioned.(July 20, 2014 at 3:25 pm)Blackout Wrote: Actually in my country if a fetus was a person legally they would have the right, since parents have the duty to provide for their children and not endanger their lives. But this is if the law considered a fetus a human person.
No, they wouldn't have that right: even if that child is dying, the parents are not forced to give up their bodies in service of that child. If the child needs an organ, the parent is not obligated to give one of theirs up. Hell, all you really need to do is age up the child but keep the situation the same:are you saying that in your country, if a two year old child needed to be hooked up to another person, day and night, in order to sustain its life, the mother would be compelled by the government to undergo that procedure against her will?
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you
