People have made the abortion debate about when this cell splits or when that organ develops, but that is not the real issue, nor the reason why all abortions should be legal (unless the baby can viably live on its own, at which point it should be a forced birth procedure).
The thing is that a woman has a right to do what she wants with HER OWN BODY and no one else's right can infringe on that. We all have bodily sovereignty, every one of us. No one can force us to give up a kidney, even if we could do it without health risks and even if it would mean saving someone else's life. Their right to live doesn't take precedence over my right to keep my kidney. The same goes for blood--even if there was a shortage of donors, people cannot be forced to give. A woman who is pregant is effectively donating her body to the life of her fetus--her time, her health, her life--and she has a right to stop that whenever she wants.
Abortion is not about the right to kill babies, it's about the right to not be pregnant. If a machine could be invented that would remove a fetus quickly, cheaply, and safely from an unwilling woman and then allow it to mature in an artificial environment and said machines were widely available, I would be the first to suggest that abortion be outlawed. Until then abortions must be allowed to continue, else we take away a fundamental human right from over half the population.
That is not entirely true. Rights have a tendency to give way when they get in the way of other peoples rights. Your right to life, your right to bodily integrety, and any other right can be forced aside when they get in the way of the right of bodily integrety, or the right of life of another If and Only If their rights are in jeopardy due to an actions you yourself made.
Getting pregnant, thus forcing a person (it it were of course) into a situation where it cannot survive (right to life) without you giving up your right to bodily integrity and lead to you losing your life.
Upvote
0