This is a reblogged post- you can read the entirety here. The pertinent parts of her post are in blockquotes, with my bolded responses underneath each.
Everyone agrees that abortion kills something that’s alive. After all, death [sic] things don’t grow! But whether it’s right to take the life of any living being depends entirely on the question: What kind of being is it?
Some people want to ignore that question altogether. They simply assume the unborn are not human beings like you and me.
Here’s now you clarify things: Whenever you hear an argument for elective abortion, ask yourself if this particular justification would also work to justify killing toddlers or other humans. If not, the argument assumes the unborn are not fully human, like toddlers. But again, that’s the issue, isn’t it?
Underline emphasis mine. There’s some crucial aspect about the difference between fetuses and toddlers/other humans that seems to be missing from this argument … can you put your finger on it? I’ll even give you a hint: it’s not about being “fully human” or anything like that. No? Nothing jumping out at ya? Well, let’s move on to the next point and see if it starts to become apparent …
1. “Women have a right to make their own private decisions.”
Imagine that a woman has a two-year-old in front of her. May she kill him or her as long as the killing is done in the privacy of the bedroom? Of course not. Why not? Because the child is a human being. If the unborn are also human, they should not be killed in the name of privacy any more than we’d kill a toddler for that same reason.
Of course, abortion advocates respond that killing a toddler and killing a fetus are two different things, like comparing apples with oranges. But that’s the issue isn’t it? Are the unborn human beings, like toddlers? That’s the one issue that matters. We can’t escape it.
If you haven’t grasped it yet, time for the big reveal: THE TODDLER ISN’T INSIDE HER. The privacy that we talk about in regards to abortion, reproductive rights, and Roe vs. Wade actually isn’t about the privacy of your bedroom. In fact, it’s the right to privacy of your body. So let’s stop with this “killing a toddler in your private bedroom” thing, eh? That’s a plain, flat-out wrong analogy. Are the unborn human beings like toddlers? That’s irrelevant. What makes the two situations different is the fact that fetuses reside inside the woman- not just in her bedroom.
2. “But many poor women cannot afford to raise another child.”
When human beings get expensive, may we kill them? Suppose a large family collectively decides to quietly dispose of its three youngest children to help ease the family budget. Would this be okay?
Abortion advocates agree it’s wrong to kill the children, but insist that aborting a fetus is not the same as killing a child. Ah, but that’s the issue: Is unjustly killing a fetus morally the same as unjustly killing a two-year-old? So, once again, the issue is the same: What is the unborn?
YOUR THREE YOUNGEST CHILDREN ARE NOT SQUATTING IN YOUR UTERUS.
3. “A woman should not be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world.”
Abortion advocates sometimes argue that killing a fetus is the more humane thing to do. “Who wants to be part of a family that rejects you? Everyone has a right to be wanted.” And if you aren’t wanted, may we kill you? Suppose a toddler is unwanted and we have good reason to think that by the time he’s five, he’ll also be abused and neglected. Should we kill him now to spare him future trouble?
The answer is obviously no, but it brings us back to the one issue that matters: What is the unborn?
It’s fascinating to me that this statement started out with “a woman”, but the response doesn’t mention her at all. It has the word “unwanted” in it, yes, but the meaning is that women shouldn’t have to undergo forced pregnancy. It’s kind of telling, in fact- so much anti-choice rationale ignores the woman and focuses on the fetus, so the misconstruction of this quote is precisely what you might expect. Either way, whatever a woman’s reason for seeking an abortion, her right to do so comes from one place: the fetus is inside of her. The legitimacy of her reasons, or lack thereof, are irrelevant.
4. “No woman should be forced to raise a child with physical disabilities.”
Suppose that you have in front of you a small boy you is mentally disabled. He’s not very bright, cannot speak or understand much of what is said, and looks strange from head to toe. Would it be morally permissible to kill him because of his condition?
Abortion advocates agree that we cannot destroy him, that we should treat him with the same care we provide all disabled human beings. But again, this raises a prior question: If the disabled unborn are humans, like the disabled toddler, should we kill them for not meeting our standard of perfection? Thus, the issue that matters most in the abortion debate isn’t disability. It’s “What is the unborn?”
“IN FRONT OF YOU” ≠ “INSIDE YOU”. If I’m starting to sound like a broken record, there’s a reason for that.
5. “Every woman has a right to decide what is right and wrong for herself.”
Would you force your morality on an abusive mother who was physically mistreating her two-year-old? You better. No human being should be abused.
You see the issue is not about forcing morality; it’s not about privacy; it’s not about economic hardship; it’s not about physical disabilities; it’s not about unwantedness. The issue is reduced to one question: What is the unborn?
When we say that every woman has a right to decide what is right and wrong for herself, we’re referring to her own body- not to anybody or anything that exists outside the barrier of her skin. So what are you talking about?
Look- if a woman was standing in front of an incubator that, through the magic of technology that does not yet exist, was holding a 12-week old fetus (the majority of abortions happen during the first trimester), and she killed it, I would absolutely consider it immoral, wrong, and illegal.
But that’s not what we’re debating. The fetus is inside of her. And her body is just that- hers. She gets to choose what happens therein, period. The answer to that repeated question- What is the unborn?- is simple: the unborn is inside of a woman. You can’t compare it to anything else, because there is nothing like it.
I’m very open to debate, and I’ll listen respectfully and offer up my thoughts if someone wants to reblog this, but if the anti-choice position boils down to “We must protect fetuses!”, then my position comes down to protecting the right to bodily autonomy against intrusion by the government (or anyone else, for that matter). Nobody should ever be able to force you to have an abortion- and the other side of the coin is that nobody should never be able to force you to get or remain pregnant, because your pregnancy happens in your body- not someone else’s.