Quote:
Originally Posted by Slighted
since we know you love hypos..
how would you reconcile the logic of being legally forced to donate blood, tissue, and other nutrients to the fetus, with the idea that you are not legally obligated to donate blood, tissue, or organs to another person, even if that person is your child?
eta- this isn't any kind of gotcha or attempt to paint your views. it's more of a thought experiement.
Actually if my spit, and my spit only, can save your life there should be a law that I donate it. But this is muddying the waters. Here is my hypo that maybe captures my point better.
Suppose a super duper doctor comes along that has both invented an incubator that allows any age embryo to grow up to be a human and has also invented a procedure that takes the embryo out of the mother's body in an extremely safe simple matter.
Plenty of woman who would have otherwise delivered the baby would opt for this. So would many of those who would otherwise had an abortion. But some of those who are fighting for the right to abort would be quite upset if there was a law that mandated that you use the super doctor's procedure and incubator if you don't want to give birth. Because, although they don't say it they not only don't want that baby in them, they don't want that baby to EXIST. I don't think that most people think that women's right's extend to that. And those that do should say it.