Pro choice gives a mother her rights as a human being to be able to
choose what she feels is best for her and the fetus inside of her. With the funding for clinics diminishing little by little, what do you feel will happen to the anti-abortion laws as a whole in upcoming years? We have already seen as stated by Mallory that the father must consent, making it so a female cannot solely make a decision as important as this on her own. In your opinion what do you think will be next?
This is a question that frightens me. I think without a strong advocate of abortion somewhere high up in government, the rights of women to choose will be hacked away little by little, until we go back to the era of drinking dangerous chemicals or trying to give oneself an abortion. I can see it being limited to cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother--which will probably be harder and harder to prove as time goes on as well.
ReplyDeleteThis is especially dangerous, because it gives rights to the fetus, an unborn unviable organism, that most people do not have. And it gives rights to the fetus that can directly counter the rights of a mother. Which makes me wonder: so a fetus is very important, important enough to make all these laws about. But what if that same fetus is a girl, and grows up and gets pregnant, and wants an abortion? Now, all of a sudden, because she's not a fetus anymore, that girl's rights are limited in a way they weren't before her birth. Makes no sense to me.
-Alexandra
In my opinion, I dont think the government has a right to put laws . it is the person's choice whether or not she wants to keep the baby. I know that may sound "morally" wrong but at the same time is it going to be the government that's going to help raise/support the kid? No they're not.
ReplyDelete