I personally would not want my wife to take the life of my conceived child - I think it is immoral and wrong. However, I fully recognize that the state cannot dictate what a mother should do with her own child (notice, I didn't say "body.") I think - sure, go ahead, kill your kid, you have every right, just don't sit there and tell me you're not killing your kid.
About sums up my view, though I do think it's a body issue. The child is living in her body and she has the right to stop supporting it at any point; the only way to keep it from siphoning resources off of her body, from effecting her with hormones that will regulate her behavior in ways that will drive her to suit its needs, etc., is to kill it. It's the same logic as allowing an abortion to save the mother's life. There is no non-violent eviction method.
My current understanding of the science does agree that, yeah, the fetus is a human being rather than 'a clump of cells' preeeeeetty early on, so I do think 'killing' is an accurate term. I'm willing to own that. I don't think the desperation to reinterpret the science and deny the more unpleasant sides of the position helps the pro-choice side's legitimacy at all.
I think it's the job of the government to protect each individual (give them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). You think murder should be kept illegal, right?
If that is the case, why should the government allow people to murder their unborn children? By your logic, should we advocate for getting rid of laws that stop us from murdering our 1 year old baby?
I personally would not want my wife to take the life of my conceived child - I think it is immoral and wrong. However, I fully recognize that the state cannot dictate what a mother should do with her own child (notice, I didn't say "body.") I think - sure, go ahead, kill your kid, you have every right, just don't sit there and tell me you're not killing your kid.
About sums up my view, though I do think it's a body issue. The child is living in her body and she has the right to stop supporting it at any point; the only way to keep it from siphoning resources off of her body, from effecting her with hormones that will regulate her behavior in ways that will drive her to suit its needs, etc., is to kill it. It's the same logic as allowing an abortion to save the mother's life. There is no non-violent eviction method.
My current understanding of the science does agree that, yeah, the fetus is a human being rather than 'a clump of cells' preeeeeetty early on, so I do think 'killing' is an accurate term. I'm willing to own that. I don't think the desperation to reinterpret the science and deny the more unpleasant sides of the position helps the pro-choice side's legitimacy at all.
I think it's the job of the government to protect each individual (give them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). You think murder should be kept illegal, right?
If that is the case, why should the government allow people to murder their unborn children? By your logic, should we advocate for getting rid of laws that stop us from murdering our 1 year old baby?
The worst atrocities in history were committed under government purview.
I do not believe in government.
I'm going to let you in on a little secret -
This is Planet Earth. There is one law: do what you want. Do what you want and reap the consequences.
A lot of people think government makes life better. I wholeheartedly disagree.
Do what you want. You are never, ever free from the consequences.
In other words: mind your own damn business. When you make someone else's business your own, you are in a world of mess.
Case study: the world..
Hey man, if you want anarchy you're free to go live in CHAZ...
The reason things always get messed up is because mankind is inherently sinful/evil. It's not much more complicated than that.