sakinago
Gold Member
- Sep 13, 2012
- 5,320
- 1,632
- 280
And I take this as confirmation that no a fetus does not have inherent value. It requires desire of the mother to raise?Was I correct in what you are saying. And if not please correct.You misrepresent what I say when referring to slavery. I'm not comparing slave to fetus, I'm comparing the ARGUMENT to owning slaves and right of property, with the ARGUMENT of right to privacy and termination of an unwanted fetus. I think that was obvious.So it does not have value unless it is wanted, just like blacks did not have value unless they were born in the north. The slave owners right to property trumps the slaves right to liberty. Just like the mothers right to "privacy" trumps the fetus right to life. The fetus is not a human, and it is alive, try to prove that it isn't. If not, then anybody with the power of attorney should be able to terminate someone on life support no matter the prognosis.
You asked a question about whether or not I thought that a fetus has value. I responded by pointing to the complexity of that issue and basically saying that the value is relative and it is not a simple yes of no answer. I also redirected you-for the third time to my previous post , in which I discussed that issue at length but apparently you still have not read it and if you did, you didn't understand it. Instead, you again misrepresent me by claiming that I am saying that the fetus has no value.
Your comparing the value of the fetus to that of slaves is ridiculous. It is a logical fallacy in the form of a false equivalency designed to obfuscate the issue. A black person has value regardless of where they worn born. A zygote or a fetus cannot be compared to a person.
You say that no, the fetus does not have protection under constitutional rights...correct?
And I assume that you believe that the murderer of the pregnant mother should be tried as a double homicide if the mother wants the fetus...correct?
You also state that value is relative correct? Relative to what exactly?
You are comparing the rights of a fetus to the rights of a slave . It's a logical fallacy as I have pointed out. You can't squirm out of that.
And I'm sorry you can't think hypothetically, but you really can't see the comparison in the arguments of property and privacy?
It was about fetuses and slaves. You couldn't win on that so now it's about property and privacy. The fact is that you can't make a coherent argument about the personhood of a fetus or against abortion so you muddy the waters with irrelevant crap
A fetus is not a person . A born human being is a person and can't be owned
A fetus is part of the woman body hence the right to privacy.
End of story