Quote:
|
Quote by: Gorgo All this talk about zygotes, etc. is important and interesting, but the most important point is that society has to draw the line somewhere or else you'd have some people dictating that no one could ever have sex. Doesn't matter if the fetus can be termed human by some. Society could draw the line at 4-year-olds. It's reasonable to draw the line at pre-birth, or at least the third trimester. Until birth, it is part of a woman's body, so let the woman decide. |
Our founding documents say that we have certain inalienable rights...one of those is the right to life...that right is ours by virtue of our humanity...not age, or class, or race, or religion...simply by virtue of being human...If you can demonstrate that somehow an unborn at some point is not a member of species homo sapiens, then we can start to discuss killing it in a rational manner...
And I don't think society would be saying that you can't have sex...I think that society would simply be saying that if you are going to have sex, be prepared to live with the consequences...just like you must accept the possible consequences of sky diving, or horse back riding, or walking in the road at night wearing dark clothing...
When Roe is struck down, there will be a monetary reason for the pharmaceutical companies to get to work on that perfect contraceptive...
Also, an unborn, at no stage is part of a woman's body...it's DNA clearly identifies it as a separate individual...it is dependent, but not part of her body...can you demonstrate some legal precedent that suggests that dependence is a valid reason to kill..