Are the rights of an undeveloped fetus superior to the rights of an adult woman?
Societies have long recognized that people’s rights in life are a function of their age and their mental capacity. From conception, to birth, to adulthood, to old age and loss of mental capacity, a person’s rights wax and wane throughout their lifetime.
Conception marks the beginning of human life and the beginning of the process of growing mental capacity. At the time of conception these cells (fetus/unborn child) have no capacity and few if any rights. For a period of time after conception the mother’s right to choose an abortion is superior to the rights of the unborn child because it has yet to acquire the right to life that a more developed unborn child has.
Life Is Sacred
Pro life advocates are motivated by the biblical principle that all human life is sacred, based on the unstated assumption that a soul is implanted by God at conception. And since all human life has a soul since conception, abortion is never allowed. Which is a sound argument for those who believe and follow the Bible.
But what about those of us who don’t believe in the Bible? The problem with this argument is that pro life advocates are supporting and promoting abortion laws that force their biblically motivated beliefs on non believers and those who interpret the Bible differently.
Murder Lite
Because life is sacred, pro life advocates argue that abortion is murder. But they don’t treat it like murder. If it actually was murder they would be calling for the parties involved, including the mothers and fathers, to be jailed for 20-30 years. Or even calling for the death penalty. An eye for an eye.
Instead, post abortion outreach services abound to bring the parents of the aborted into the church for counseling rather than prison time. This lack of punishment is an acknowledgment that abortion is not murder. Pro life advocates are acknowledging the unborn child’s relative lack of rights by calling for little or no punishment for the parents who “murdered” them.
Where Do Draw The Line
Both pro life and pro choice advocates recognize that at some point in it’s development an unborn child acquires the right to life. But they differ on where to draw this line.
Pro life advocates draw the line at conception. Which means no elective abortions.
Pro choice advocated draw the line somewhere between conception and birth. Typically at the point where the fetus (unborn child) becomes viable and able to live outside of the womb. While viability is a somewhat arbitrary line, it gives the parents the opportunity to discover she is pregnant and time to research their options and make an informed decision. After this point an abortion is no longer an option.
Religious Freedom
Homosexuality and access to contraception are religious freedom issues because they are accepted by much of America’s population but not by the Christian Right. Murder is not a religious freedom issue because it is against both secular and Christian values.
The courts have recognized gay rights, contraception, and (paying for) abortion as religious freedom issues. Laws against abortion are the harshest and most numerous in Christian dominated countries. The pro choice movement is accepted by many western and secular nations.
Abortion is accepted by much of America’s population but is considered as murder by the Christian Right’s pro life movement. The pro choice argument is about the balance of rights between the parents and their undeveloped child. Pro life is a religious argument founded on biblical beliefs.
And one of the limits of religious freedom is to not force those beliefs onto others. Pro choice advocates are not forcing their beliefs onto pro life advocates. But pro life advocates are forcing their (religious) beliefs onto pro choice advocates.
Abortion is religious freedom issue which needs to be labeled and argued as such.