Question For Pro-Choice People

[BmorePat87]

(05-16-2019, 06:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Not purposely. I've already told Brad his example of cutting off limbs was silly but IMO his article of parents purposely trying to make their child deaf is equivalent to a parent wanting a child to be born without all limbs. Brad did say take it out to break limbs; I'm assuming he meant they reinserted it. 

We're not comparing their desire, we're comparing the action of acting on the desire. One involves an invasive surgery that mutilates a fetus. The other involved picking who to have sex with. One directly interacts with the fetus while one involves deciding which sperm you want to fertilize your ovum. One straight up involves a fetus inside of a woman's body. One does not. 

Quote:I think his point is more toward the women's ownership of the unborn and her "right" to do with it as she sees fit.

He specifically says "just because it's the woman's body and she can do what she wants?". He may see the pro-choice position of "women own their bodies" as implying that women "own the fetus". I've never made that argument and I do not think I have ever seen that from the pro choice crowd here, so I am going off of what was stated. Regardless of this distinction, we're in agreement that it's a philosophical discussion over women doing what they want to that fetus. 

In the example of using a deaf man's sperm, there's no fetus. There's no manipulation of that fetus. There's no arguing you can do it because it is inside you. It's "I want to have a child with these traits so I am reproducing with someone with those traits".