Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: Right to use their mother's womb

  1. #1
    tWebber
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    218
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    30

    Right to use their mother's womb

    Unborn humans belong in their mother's womb. Their mother's womb is their rightful place. They have the right to use their mother's body for life support. Pro-choicers object by saying that unborn humans do not have the right to use a woman's body unless the woman gives that right to them. Moreover, they would say that the woman gets to decide what the rightful place of the unborn human is. The only response that I can think of is that God gave unborn humans the right to use their mother's womb for life support. Is there any other response that you can think of?

  2. #2
    Theologyweb's Official Grandfather Jedidiah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Peter's Creek, Alaska
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,564
    Amen (Given)
    18989
    Amen (Received)
    6145
    By engaging in activities that brought the unborn child into her womb (the child had no choice), she did actually not only give the right to occupy the womb, but with no input from the child effectively forced it there.
    Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

  3. #3
    tWebber Carrikature's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Oregon
    Faith
    Non-Theist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,578
    Amen (Given)
    2084
    Amen (Received)
    1072
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaxb View Post
    Unborn humans belong in their mother's womb. Their mother's womb is their rightful place. They have the right to use their mother's body for life support. Pro-choicers object by saying that unborn humans do not have the right to use a woman's body unless the woman gives that right to them. Moreover, they would say that the woman gets to decide what the rightful place of the unborn human is. The only response that I can think of is that God gave unborn humans the right to use their mother's womb for life support. Is there any other response that you can think of?
    Don't conflate "rightful" (this is proper) with "right" (legally protected ability). If you're going to use rights language, you'd be better off saying that a person's right to life exceeds another person's right to property. In this case, the woman's body is considered her property. Even this line of reasoning will fail pretty hard if taken to it's logical conclusion, since it would mean you're required to provide certain organs to those whose life is in jeopardy without a transplant.

    I generally discourage rights language for a reason. There's nothing concrete about rights. Even claiming that something is "God-given" will be easily dismissed by a non-theist.

    It'd be better, in my opinion, to hold consent to carry a child to term as being an implicit part of consensual sex. Use of birth control minimizes the risk of unwanted pregnancy but doesn't remove the potential.
    I'm not here anymore.

  4. #4
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Virgo Supercluster
    Faith
    Theistic, of sorts
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,410
    Amen (Given)
    318
    Amen (Received)
    541
    This seems reminiscent of the debate over Judith Thomson's infamous Violinist argument.
    Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

    I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

  5. #5
    Theologyweb's Official Grandfather Jedidiah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Peter's Creek, Alaska
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,564
    Amen (Given)
    18989
    Amen (Received)
    6145
    Quote Originally Posted by Carrikature View Post
    Don't conflate "rightful" (this is proper) with "right" (legally protected ability). If you're going to use rights language, you'd be better off saying that a person's right to life exceeds another person's right to property. In this case, the woman's body is considered her property. Even this line of reasoning will fail pretty hard if taken to it's logical conclusion, since it would mean you're required to provide certain organs to those whose life is in jeopardy without a transplant.

    I generally discourage rights language for a reason. There's nothing concrete about rights. Even claiming that something is "God-given" will be easily dismissed by a non-theist.

    It'd be better, in my opinion, to hold consent to carry a child to term as being an implicit part of consensual sex. Use of birth control minimizes the risk of unwanted pregnancy but doesn't remove the potential.
    Your approach may be better, but the result is that the unborn child has implicit consent to use the uterus. That was, obviously, my point.
    Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

  6. Amen Carrikature amen'd this post.
  7. #6
    tWebber Carrikature's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Oregon
    Faith
    Non-Theist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,578
    Amen (Given)
    2084
    Amen (Received)
    1072
    Quote Originally Posted by Jedidiah View Post
    Your approach may be better, but the result is that the unborn child has implicit consent to use the uterus. That was, obviously, my point.
    I took a long time writing it. I didn't see your post until after I posted.
    I'm not here anymore.

  8. #7
    41st Mojave Summer DesertBerean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Barstow, CA
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    5,655
    Amen (Given)
    4626
    Amen (Received)
    1765
    Both approaches have merit.

  9. #8
    Professor KingsGambit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Next to you
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,579
    Amen (Given)
    1402
    Amen (Received)
    3754
    For the layperson, the analogy I would use is that this is equivalent to inviting somebody over to your house and then calling the police and accusing them of trespassing when they come in.
    Do not say, “Why were the old days better than these?”
    For it is not wise to ask such questions. - Ecclesiastes 7:10

  10. Amen Jedidiah amen'd this post.
  11. #9
    41st Mojave Summer DesertBerean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Barstow, CA
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    5,655
    Amen (Given)
    4626
    Amen (Received)
    1765
    Not bad.

  12. #10
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    37,742
    Amen (Given)
    3444
    Amen (Received)
    17997
    Quote Originally Posted by KingsGambit View Post
    For the layperson, the analogy I would use is that this is equivalent to inviting somebody over to your house and then calling the police and accusing them of trespassing when they come in.
    more like inviting them in and then shooting them dead for trespassing.

  13. Amen Jedidiah, Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •