My god. I leave the continent for five seconds and return to find that Say Uncle
both have used the time to argue against me and remain unrefuted by me. Well, I'm back and, boys, I've got some questions.
For the Uncle:
1. Tubal pregnancies can't be carried to term. Is ending those pregnancies "heinous, disgusting and deplorable"?
2. Is it "heinous, disgusting and deplorable" for a doctor to abort one fetus in order to give its twin a better shot at making it to term?
3. Is it "heinous, disgusting and deplorable" to abort a fetus with disabilities that will mean that it will die a horrible and painful death shortly after being born?
1. You say
However, abortion is violence. It is murder. Once you have established that, as Uncle seems to, the negotiation must stop. At that point you must stand on principle and find a way to accept and/or alleviate the consequences of a prohibition that is morally and ethically necessary.
What is the proper punishment for women who have abortions? Life in prison or the death penalty?
2. You still have not addressed my concern that you don't believe that women can have full citizenship
. So, I'll bring it up again. If a fetus has a right to life that ALWAYS trumps the right of the woman to do with her own body what she likes--including not carrying a pregnancy to term--you are saying that women have rights only as long as they don't infringe on the rights of the fetus. There is no other group of people singled out by the law and told that their rights can ALWAYS be curtailed by another group.
Your position leaves no room for the woman's rights to ever trump the rights of the fetus, therefore making me a different, lesser kind of citizen than you.
Maybe you believe this--that the state has such a compelling need to control what happens in a woman's uterus, that women cannot be citizens to the extent that men can, but I'd appreciate you saying this out loud.
If you believe that women are equal under the law to men, how can you abide by the state controlling one of her internal organs?