I'm curious what pro-choicers feel about this. I've heard the argument made that the mother has the right to decide whether to end her pregnancy because its her body.
1. Does the pro-choicer believe that a fetus is a human? Does it depend on the stage of development? What about once the fetus has its own brain waves at around 40 days?
2. If the pro-choicer does believe the fetus is human at some point in the pregnancy, why is the mantra "the mother's right to choose because its her body" totally ignore the fetus' body?
3. Does the pro-choicer believe because the fetus is totally dependent on and inside of the mother's body, she has the right to end his/her (the fetus') life?
4. If so, where do we draw the line? Would it be the mother's right to choose to kill an infant while it is still totally dependent on the mother, with the only difference being that it is now able to be seen since it is now outside of the mother?
The notion of choice is elevated to such a level that pro-choicers rarely address the issue of what's at stake unless the issue is forced upon them. If you're busy in the kitchen and your child comes to you and says, "can I kill this?" probably your first question is going to be, "well, what is it?". You don't consider the child's importance of freedom of choice to supercede what it is the child is wanting to kill. So why don't we drop the whole thing about "the right to choose" and focus our energies on what's being terminated; a human or a non-human. Law always, and rightly so, restricts our choices to what is appropriate and to what does not harm others.
Tags: