Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Danzig
i find it odd that the democrats generally support the right to choose--but then get on their high horse about the war overseas, and about capital punishment. it seems they, and the republicans in turn, don't always use logic. if a soldiers life is precious, why not a fetus? if one is sacrosanct, why not the other?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by somerfrost
Each of us has the ultimate decision regarding our own bodies but if that is a human being inside a woman, does he/she not have the same right? We talk about a woman's right to choose, but we deny that right to the fetus/baby...statistically speaking, half of which are female. To me, what the abortionists are saying is that some people have rights and some don't and society gets to choose which lives are more valuable.
|
I believe that the basic flaw in the argument that you're both making (and I'm mostly just speaking for myself here) is that most people who talk about a woman's right to choose vs. a fetus's or soldiers dying while fetuses are "dying" is that those people don't believe that a fetus is a person deserving of the same rights that a pregnant woman or a soldier deserves.
It's not hypocritical to be pro-choice and still cry about dead soldiers in a stupid war. One is life that is being taken, and one is not a life so therefore cannot be taken.
That obviously brings it to that place where nobody ever budges on where exactly life starts and when an embryo/fetus/womb inhabiter earns its rights as a human being. But if you don't believe that it's a life in there, then it's not really a problem to advocate for safe and legal abortion while decrying the loss of life in a war.