Embed Notice

@freemo @lucifargundam @louis Good discussion here so far. Everyone can have opinions, but which should have weight? Mainly with lucifar here, personal impact should determine this.

I'd like to add that fetuses "rights", be they legal or ethical rights, are usually viewed a bit short sighted.

A mere right to live does not reflect what the ethical consequences are, and a legal right without considering the actual consequences (after birth) runs afoul of the same ethical problem.

So i see two possibilities:
- guaranteeing a right to live and putting actual work behind the contextual issues: access to birth control (prevent unwanted pregnancy), timely access to abortion (important especially in case of rape), providing care for the birthed baby (not an unwilling mothers job), securing the ability of the growing human to actually lead a good life and not just subsist.
This i can take seriously as an opinion (even if i might disagree, depending on details).

- guaranteeing only the right to live, but just some hand waving at most for the rest of the issues.
In this case, i would have to assume the fetus rights are not the actual issue.

To summarize, if anyone who may or may not be up to the task is forced to do anything, the process is surely an unethical one. Claiming to act in stead of someone who does not have a voice needs diligence and foresight, or it is a false claim.