What I learned trying to classify abortion access across the rich world

Re:What I learned trying to classify abortion access across ... by rayiner on Monday July 18, 2022 @04:01PM (#32142917)

> .... So even IF we grant that a gamete or zygote or 4 cells or 6 weeks old fetus or whatever are live beings based on whatever definition we agree or fail to agree on; what rational differentiator would cause us to force a woman to donate blood and organs, sacrifice and risk their health for them?

Because the moral obligations of mothers (and parents generally) to their children are different than the moral obligations surrounding blood donations or anything else. If you said that fathers have a moral obligation to sacrifice their bodies and lives for their kids, either in providing for them or in war, most of the people who oppose abortions would agree with you.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What I learned trying to classify abortion access across ... by NikolaNovak on Monday July 18, 2022 @04:08PM (#32142998)

I feel I've addressed this a priori:

  "Lest somebody tries to muddle the issue, I'm also not required to donate blood or organs to my two children, or my sibling, or my spouse; I should, and I likely would, but I'm not legally forced."

I get this is uncomfortable; I understand it's unpalatable; most people don't like to get into nitty gritty dilemmas. But we do not, repeat do not, require parents to donate blood or organs to their children... at least, not after they're born. Some countries do try to require it before their children are born though. Through this perspective, this feels at least backwards and misguided, and plays into the pro-choice (unfair and dishonest) stereotype meme about caring more about unborn children than born ones :-/

[ Parent | on HN ]