LogFAQs > #898409375

HHH is the game posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

But euthanasia and abortion are separate. And the reason I say that it might not even be the most important issue, is because the issue of bodily autonomy is more critical to the discussion. It's through the issue of bodily autonomy that there is no inconsistency regarding how I treat the baby before and after it's born.

Understandable, but its still an important question, because if a fetus is not a life then its ONLY an issue of bodily autonomy.

If a fetus is a life its an issue of bodily autonomy vs the life of a child.

That, in my opinion, is a very different argument, and it hinges on the question on if a fetus is a life

It's alive, yes. And I said most, not only. And this should not be viewed as a battle between bodily autonomy vs the life of a human. It's a measured decision made on the back of all the factors at play, both from a more philosophical perspective as well as a pragmatic one.

We have a situation where a living thing is inside another living thing. As a society that values control over one's explicit body (which is the same reason you have to sign consent form after consent form for various medical procedures, even including posthumous organ donation), it is unreasonable to force an individual to carry an unwanted life inside their own body. It doesn't matter whether it's human life or not. Giving that right over one's own body to the individual is a critical allowance our society offers its citizens. That is the primary argument for why abortion should be allowed.

The only thing it being a human life really brings to the table is to compare the personhood of the fetus to the personhood of the mother when making a decision. And I see no good reason that the fetus should be granted greater personhood than the mother.