If this is the perspective of one of your pro-choice friends, then biological or philosophical arguments that the unborn is a human being are not likely to change his mind about abortion. The important thing is that women can do what they want with their bodies, no matter what. Even if they don’t believe that the unborn is a human being, sometimes they don’t think that issue matters. But pro-choice people are generally oriented differently. The pro-life mind is generally oriented towards the unborn: the unborn is a human being, and it should be illegal to kill human beings, so abortion should be illegal. Since I began asking for clarification on this, I have found that bodily rights arguments are much more common than I had previously thought. Do you mean that the unborn is not a valuable human being because it is inside the woman or do you mean that even if it is a valuable human being, that a woman has the right to kill it because it’s inside her and she can do what she wants with her body?”Īlmost every time, he responds by saying he meant the latter. “I want to understand you, but it sounds like you might be saying one of two different things. I ask a similar question when people say that the unborn is inside the woman, such as:
![rich poupard white pages michigan rich poupard white pages michigan](https://ebrcgtryq1-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Sen.-Buzz-Thomas.-1-1.png)
Do you mean that the unborn is literally a part of her body, like a functional part or something or do you mean that because it is inside her body and connected to her body that she has the right to kill it because she can do what she wants with her body?”Īlmost every time I have asked this question, the pro-choice advocate has said that he meant the latter. For instance, when someone said the unborn is part of the mother’s body, I asked: If someone made one of the above pro-choice statements, I would clarify if he was arguing that the unborn isn’t human or if he was making a bodily rights argument. Could I have simply been misunderstanding them all along? Why would anyone admit that the unborn is a valuable human being and say it’s okay to kill it? Then I started thinking about all of the conversations I’d had in which pro-choice people made references to the woman’s body and how it didn’t seem to matter to them when I demonstrated that the unborn is a separate human organism. When I first heard this distinction, it seemed foreign to me. Learning to Recognize Bodily Rights Arguments But as Trent Horn has pointed out, there is a third type of pro-choice justification, one that 3) admits the unborn is human and says that the woman can kill it anyway because of her bodily rights. One might be tempted to think that all pro-choice justifications can be accurately summarized as either 1) assuming the unborn isn’t human or 2) arguing that the unborn isn’t human. In contrast, attempting to give a reason that the unborn is not a valuable human being would make a better argument. If the unborn is human, like the toddler, then we can’t kill the unborn in the name of poverty any more than we would kill a toddler. He is assuming the unborn is not a valuable human because (presumably) he wouldn’t say women should have the right to kill their toddlers if they are too poor. For instance, when a pro-choice advocate says abortion should be legal because some women are too poor to have a child, he is begging the question.
![rich poupard white pages michigan rich poupard white pages michigan](https://platedish.com/cache/1/BingImages_5640.png)
Pro-life people generally think there is one question to answer in order to determine the morality of abortion: “What is the unborn?” Generally speaking, there is merit to this idea. The pro-life advocate hears, “The fetus is not human,” but the pro-choice advocate means, “ It doesn’t matter if the fetus is human.”
RICH POUPARD WHITE PAGES MICHIGAN HOW TO
Many pro-choice advocates don’t know how to articulate this argument in a way that helps pro-life advocates understand. In many cases, though, the pro-choice advocate is intending to communicate that the woman can do what she wants even if the fetus is a human being. If the pro-choice advocate is confused about whether the unborn is a separate organism from the mother, then graciously giving him an impromptu biology lesson might be helpful.
![rich poupard white pages michigan rich poupard white pages michigan](https://www.miindia.com/miimages/business/oct20/Tyrone-Woods-miindia.jpg)
The pro-choice statements above are ambiguous. When a pro-life advocate hears statements like these, a common impulse is to respond by saying, “But it’s not her body it’s another body!” or “If the fetus is part of her body, does she have two heads and twenty toes?” or, perhaps, “But the unborn is a human being, here’s some evidence for that…”