Tuesday, 28 June 2022

"The anti-abortionists’ claim to being 'pro-life' is a classic Big Lie."


'Flaming June' by Frederick Leighton

"[Nearly [fif]ty years after Roe V. Wade, no one defends the right to abortion in fundamental, moral terms, which is why the pro-abortion rights forces are on the defensive.
    "Abortion-rights advocates should not cede the terms 'pro-life' and 'right to life' to the anti-abortionists. It is a woman’s right to her life that gives her the right to terminate her pregnancy.
    "Nor should abortion-rights advocates keep hiding behind the phrase 'a woman’s right to choose'” Does she have the right to choose murder? That’s what abortion would be, if the fetus were a person.
    "The status of the embryo in the first trimester is the basic issue that cannot be sidestepped. The embryo is clearly pre-human; only the mystical notions of religious dogma treat this clump of cells as constituting a person.
    "We must not confuse potentiality with actuality.... That tiny growth, that mass of protoplasm, exists as a part of a woman’s body. It is not an independently existing, biologically formed organism, let alone a person. That which lives within the body of another can claim no right against its host. Rights belong only to individuals, not to collectives or to parts of an individual.
    "('Independent' does not mean self-supporting–a child who depends on its parents for food, shelter, and clothing, has rights because it is an actual, separate human being.)
    "'Rights,' in Ayn Rand’s words, 'do not pertain to a potential, only to an actual being. A child cannot acquire any rights until it is born.'
    "It is only on this base that we can support the woman’s political right to do what she chooses in this issue. No other person–not even her husband–has the right to dictate what she may do with her own body. That is a fundamental principle of freedom....
    "Abortions are private affairs and often involve painfully difficult decisions with life-long consequences. But, tragically, the lives of the parents are completely ignored by the anti-abortionists. Yet that is the essential issue. In any conflict it’s the actual, living persons who count, not the mere potential of the embryo....
    "The anti-abortionists’ attitude, however, is: 'The actual life of the parents be damned! Give up your life, liberty, property and the pursuit of your own happiness.
    "Sentencing a woman to sacrifice her life to an embryo is not upholding the 'right-to-life.'
    "The anti-abortionists’ claim to being 'pro-life' is a classic Big Lie. You cannot be in favour of life and yet demand the sacrifice of an actual, living individual to a clump of tissue.
    "Anti-abortionists are not lovers of life–lovers of tissue, maybe. But their stand marks them as haters of real human beings."
          ~ philosopher Leonard Peikoff, from his article 'Abortion Rights are Pro-Life'


2 comments:

MarkT said...

I used to agree with that entirely. But I'm no longer convinced that rights begin only at the moment the baby leaves the womb. I'd suggest that a baby has rights immediately before it is born, because it would possible to take the baby from the womb and be independent. In the weeks leading up to birth it's essentially human. But I'd agree with Peikoff that in the first trimester it is pre-human. When exactly it becomes human though I'm not sure.

Phil S said...

""The anti-abortionists’ claim to being 'pro-life' is a classic Big Lie. You cannot be in favour of life and yet demand the sacrifice of an actual, living individual to a clump of tissue." - That is itself a big lie by only referring to the first trimester

When you believe life only begins at birth you should read about the other end of the spectrum. Kermit Gosnell will live in infamy. He snipped the necks of born live babies with secateurs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell
The latest California law infers that infants only get legal recognition 28 days AFTER birth. Legalised infanticide. Downs and Autistic babies will be subjected to eugenics.

I agree with MarkT. A woman has rights to early terminate an unwanted pregnancy. At some point while still in the womb, the foetus becomes viable outside, obviously with medical support. A civilised society would allow early termination but would recognise that a heartbeat and viability outside the womb is a transition point after which medical support should change to supporting both lives. That is the law in Europe and New Zealand.

All the Supreme Court decision has done is to return the choice to the people rather than the judiciary which is where it should be.