Quote:
|
The child can't control it's own body...
|
So if a baby is born paralyzed, it's not a person? What does that have to do with anything?
The fact that it CANT control it's own body does not make it
property to be disposed of as the mother see's fit.
Quote:
|
...and if you own take into account the child's rights (i.e stop abortion) then you neglect the Mother's right to chose what happens to her body.
|
No I dont. The argument isnt about
her body. It is about the body of the child.
Scenerio: You have two conjoined twins. Separating them will kill the weaker one. Does the stronger one have a right to force a separation? After all, it IS their own body they are controlling, right?
That was the argument that changed my mind on abortion. The fact that one of two connected people is stronger than the other does not mean they can kill the other one.
Quote:
|
Not in the slightest. At a point when the baby could survive outside of the mothers body, I agree.
|
So people only have rights when they can survive unassisted? Is that your criteria?
Quote:
|
But for a deal of the pregnancy, the fetus is a collection of cells inside the mothers body, which her body produced, and her body is sustaining, and thus, I would consider a part of the mothers body.
|
See my conjoined twin example above.
Quote:
|
Which is why the abortion question will only be settled by compromise, not by the total victory of one side or another. Because it involves the collision of two competing, but legitimate interests -- which means any one-sided solution will be unjust to some degree.
|
One injustice results in death. The other results in short or longer term pain and inconvenience. Death is worse.
Quote:
Me: Furthermore, the baby's brain waves can be detected at 6 weeks, while viability is typically 22 to 24 weeks.
Brain waves just mean there is electrical activity.
|
Since we have no way of knowing for sure, I prefer to err on the side of caution.