Perhaps you are right about one thing. Perhaps unborn fetuses are human. They have human DNA, they grow in the uteruses of human females. They are most likely 100% human.
But there are several reasons why the right to terminate and prevent pregnancies should be in the hands of every person who has a uterus and that person alone.
While the fetus has human DNA, our civil and legal system with their attendant rights are based on the idea of Personhood. And nowhere in that body of law from the Torah to the Code of Hammurabi to the Magna Carta is the idea of personhood being extended to anyone other than born, living humans.
In addition, even though the fetus does have human DNA and may have a human soul residing within, something that I accept may be true, that does not trump the rights of the female with the uterus to her bodily integrity. There is no true right to life unless the body you inhabit has the security of their personhood. NO PARTY SHOULD BE THE MERE INSTRUMENT OF ANOTHER.
For example, in 1978 Robert McFall, suffering from a rare bone marrow disease sought a court order to force his cousin David Shimp, the only compatible donor, to submit to a transplant. The court declined, explaining, "For our law to compel the defendant to submit to an intrusion of his body would change every concept and principle upon which our society is founded. To do so would defeat the sanctity of the individual and would impose a rule which would know no limits."
This is exactly the case with the right to terminate pregnancy.
The fact is, if you force a woman to give birth to a fetus that she does not want, you are giving that fetus more human rights than any other person on the planet. You could never force someone to undergo a surgery, or life threatening or at least dangerous surgery or procedure in order for someone else to live. In the end, it is simply extending the same equal rights to every living person on the planet.
Posted on November 17 at 2:46 p.m.Suggest removal
Perhaps you are right about one thing. Perhaps unborn fetuses are human. They have human DNA, they grow in the uteruses of human females. They are most likely 100% human.
But there are several reasons why the right to terminate and prevent pregnancies should be in the hands of every person who has a uterus and that person alone.
While the fetus has human DNA, our civil and legal system with their attendant rights are based on the idea of Personhood. And nowhere in that body of law from the Torah to the Code of Hammurabi to the Magna Carta is the idea of personhood being extended to anyone other than born, living humans.
In addition, even though the fetus does have human DNA and may have a human soul residing within, something that I accept may be true, that does not trump the rights of the female with the uterus to her bodily integrity. There is no true right to life unless the body you inhabit has the security of their personhood. NO PARTY SHOULD BE THE MERE INSTRUMENT OF ANOTHER.
For example, in 1978 Robert McFall, suffering from a rare bone marrow disease sought a court order to force his cousin David Shimp, the only compatible donor, to submit to a transplant. The court declined, explaining, "For our law to compel the defendant to submit to an intrusion of his body would change every concept and principle upon which our society is founded. To do so would defeat the sanctity of the individual and would impose a rule which would know no limits."
This is exactly the case with the right to terminate pregnancy.
The fact is, if you force a woman to give birth to a fetus that she does not want, you are giving that fetus more human rights than any other person on the planet. You could never force someone to undergo a surgery, or life threatening or at least dangerous surgery or procedure in order for someone else to live. In the end, it is simply extending the same equal rights to every living person on the planet.
On