View Single Post
  #26  
Old 08-01-2007, 04:37 PM
luckyme luckyme is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,778
Default Re: Better Restated Abortion Question

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My point of course is that many woman who choose to have an abortion disingenously use the argument that they have a right to do what they want with their body, even though their real agenda is that the baby does not survive.

[/ QUOTE ]
hmmm. I have the right to cut my toenails even if you have some super technology that turns them into babies.

seems to me the only issue is the value of the thing you're sticking in the machine (not what comes out).

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

If DS were a magician, his OP would fall under 'misdirection'. The 'agenda' is the RIGHT of a person, their reasons for wanting to exercise that right are not that relevant. The disingenuous part is slipping into the premise that there is a baby to survive.

On the slippery slope front - if people lose the right to what happens to their body then my liver is at threat if DS's henchmen decide there is a 'higher need' and my reasons aren't sufficient. Perhaps claiming that my real agenda is I want the sick kid in Bulgaria to die.

A newborns value ( never mind a fetus) varies with it's fit in the society. When babies are relatively rare and the adult they become is in demand then newborns are valuable. The reason female infanticide has been practiced is because of that.

NEWS - Iran announces it can produce a million fetuses a week and raise them in army barracks.
"Oh, how cute, let's send them booties" may not be the world-wide response.

The two issues raised by the OP, mainly by sleight of hand, are - Do I have Rights over parts of my body?
and - Are acorns as valuable as oak trees?
As you note - Do toenails and skin cells ( which in an advanced technology are potential people, just as fetuses are) have personhood rights because of their potential?

Trying to focus the discussion on 'motive' is a Red Whale. Even if there were no legal obligations currently, there is still issues like - I don't want to be used to create a later demand for parts of my body for DNA reasons on some 'greater good' argument, etc ( teenager will die without transplant, say).

If there is one property right that seems self-evident, it's my ownership of my body, motive-smotive.

I have the Right not to eat dinner. Claims that my real agenda is to bankrupt walmart and put illegal aliens out of work are irrelevant. Either I have that right or I don't.

luckyme
Reply With Quote