right wingers are out with signs that say "my body my choice". i think i set one of the settings wrong and ended up on the wrong timeline
@raphael the body being referred to is the one with the uterus. the choice to have an empty uterus has nothing to do with the fetus.
@sneak the fetus is *another* body as well. Those saying "my body my choice" are acting on another body.
Whether you don't want to recognize that body as a person with basic right to live is another matter, but I didn't want to get into a abortion debate, just wanted to point out that - within a conservative logical system - there is no inconsistency.
@raphael the fetus has no inherent rights to the nutrients or connection to the host body. that's the inconsistency.
@sneak is there any other way that body can develop? If not, denying their right to live inside the body is the same as denying their right to live at all.
@raphael no but that isn't the host body's problem. and it's not denying the right to live, it is denying access to the energy and nutrients of the host body. subtle difference in terms of rights.
@sneak a fetus does not grow by sucking off "energy and nutrients from the host body", but this is the kind of silly sophomoric debate that I rather not have.
Much better to simply take the position that the fetus' right to live is secondary to the woman's right to her bodily autonomy. I may not agree with it, but I don't need to. At least it is honest and doesn't need to get into moral/philosophical contortions to sustain it.
@sneak the problem with "my body my choice" when applied to the abortion debate is that the fetus is *not* the woman's body. So in a way, they are still consistent. ;)