buttercup said:
Yep, the preborn is not your body, not for you to control.
Fuck if it isn't. My body, including its contents, is mine and mine alone. It's not yours, not society's. A nation that claims otherwise has lost respect for the most fundamental of human rights.
No, you own yourself and you alone. No human being is property, not even your own offspring. And the fact that you actually think that another human being is your property is horrific, and brings to mind the same mentality as slaveowners.
Wrong.
This fails as a false comparison fallacy.
The 14th Amendment acknowledged the citizenship of former slaves and codified their rights as Americans born in the United States.
Unlike a former slave, an embryo/fetus is not a person born in the United States; as a consequence, it is not a citizen, not a person, and not entitled to Constitutional protections.
Moreover, because a woman was born in the United States and a citizen of the United States, her right to privacy is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment:
‘Constitutional protection of the woman's decision to terminate her pregnancy derives from the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It declares that no State shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." The controlling word in the case before us is "liberty." Although a literal reading of the Clause might suggest that it governs only the procedures by which a State may deprive persons of liberty, for at least 105 years, at least since
Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623, 660-661 (1887), the Clause has been understood to contain a substantive component as well, one "barring certain government actions regardless of the fairness of the procedures used to implement them."'
ibid
In this case, government actions seeking to compel a woman to give birth against her will through force of law.
