How would pro-choicers respond to this?

[Jaxb]

Some pro-choicers make this argument:

Suppose that you are in need of a kidney transplant in order to survive, and that your mother is the only person who can provide you with a kidney and hence preserve your life. Do you have a right to use your mother's kidney? The answer is "No." Since you do not have the right to use your mother's kidney, a fetus would not have the right to use his or her mother's uterus. Hence, it would be morally permissible for the mother to get an abortion.

Some pro-lifers respond by saying:

The analogy between the person needing a kidney and pregnancy is not a good analogy. The uterus exists for another person's body. The womb was designed to provide nourishment for another human being. A particular kidney was designed for the particular person who has the kidney. It was not designed for anyone except for the person who has it.

How would pro-choicers respond to the response of the pro-lifers?

[Sparko]

The baby didn't magically appear in the mother's uterus one day and start sucking life-force from her like some alien. The baby is there because of direct actions take by the mother, and her uterus is actually designed to host and grow offspring so it is doing what it is supposed to do. It is nothing like stealing someone's organs without permission to keep you alive.

[Catholicity]

The baby didn't magically appear in the mother's uterus one day and start sucking life-force from her like some alien. The baby is there because of direct actions take by the mother, and her uterus is actually designed to host and grow offspring so it is doing what it is supposed to do. It is nothing like stealing someone's organs without permission to keep you alive.

That. I'm housing one right now. Deliberately. This is the third one, and believe me I know how they all got there. I think the argument is VERY weak by pro-choicers and an attempt to escape the "consequence" for one's actions. If you can't raise one, or do not want to, then do not put yourself in a situation where you would have to. This idea of responsibility seems to be too great for society.

[Christianbookworm]

That. I'm housing one right now. Deliberately. This is the third one, and believe me I know how they all got there. I think the argument is VERY weak by pro-choicers and an attempt to escape the "consequence" for one's actions. If you can't raise one, or do not want to, then do not put yourself in a situation where you would have to. This idea of responsibility seems to be too great for society.

Awww... how old is your baby?

[Catholicity]

Awww... how old is your baby?

I'm 7 weeks pregnant and the one born last year is 15 months old

[Jedidiah]

The baby didn't magically appear in the mother's uterus one day and start sucking life-force from her like some alien. The baby is there because of direct actions take by the mother, and her uterus is actually designed to host and grow offspring so it is doing what it is supposed to do. It is nothing like stealing someone's organs without permission to keep you alive.

The woman has effectively given permission for the use of her uterus in any case, by inviting the new person in.

[Sparko]

The woman has effectively given permission for the use of her uterus in any case, by inviting the new person in.

and think about all those evil born-already children that drain their parent's bank accounts and actually depend on adults to live. They suck away my taxes, make us educate them, want presents celebrating the day they left their host body, and so on. They should just be kicked out into the world to fend for themselves.

[One Bad Pig]

Why not post this where pro-choicers can respond themselves? It's their views you want, after all, right?

[Christianbookworm]

I'm 7 weeks pregnant and the one born last year is 15 months old

So, still a little embryo? Are embryos less hassle than a toddler?

[Catholicity]

So, still a little embryo? Are embryos less hassle than a toddler?

One makes me gag a lot and the other one makes me run after her to keep up Its a balancing act. The oldest I have to keep on her to do her homework

To all pro-choicers. MOTHER HOOD IS SELF SACRIFICE

[Teallaura]

Some pro-choicers make this argument:

Suppose that you are in need of a kidney transplant in order to survive, and that your mother is the only person who can provide you with a kidney and hence preserve your life. Do you have a right to use your mother's kidney? The answer is "No." Since you do not have the right to use your mother's kidney, a fetus would not have the right to use his or her mother's uterus. Hence, it would be morally permissible for the mother to get an abortion.

Some pro-lifers respond by saying:

The analogy between the person needing a kidney and pregnancy is not a good analogy. The uterus exists for another person's body. The womb was designed to provide nourishment for another human being. A particular kidney was designed for the particular person who has the kidney. It was not designed for anyone except for the person who has it.

How would pro-choicers respond to the response of the pro-lifers?

In answer to your question, they would respond basically 'is, too'. The analogy fails on its face, so they are left pretending that it isn't a total Failure.

[Christianbookworm]

Why is it a crime for parents to abandon their young children? Infants/toddlers/preschoolers can be annoying and hard to care for. And they're a lot more noisy than an unborn baby...



Disclaimer: I am NOT advocating that it be okay to force young children to fend for themselves and starve to death/accidentally kill themselves(young kids don't really have the ability to keep themselves from making lethal choices). That would be horrible.

[Catholicity]

Why is it a crime for parents to abandon their young children? Infants/toddlers/preschoolers can be annoying and hard to care for. And they're a lot more noisy than an unborn baby...



Disclaimer: I am NOT advocating that it be okay to force young children to fend for themselves and starve to death/accidentally kill themselves(young kids don't really have the ability to keep themselves from making lethal choices). That would be horrible.

Good question.... I would start a thread about that one.

[Christianbookworm]

Good question.... I would start a thread about that one.

I'm being sarcastic! I bet pro choicers would claim that parents can always get someone else to take care of a baby after birth, but there can be no babysitters for an unborn baby.

[shunyadragon]

Some pro-choicers make this argument:

Suppose that you are in need of a kidney transplant in order to survive, and that your mother is the only person who can provide you with a kidney and hence preserve your life. Do you have a right to use your mother's kidney? The answer is "No." Since you do not have the right to use your mother's kidney, a fetus would not have the right to use his or her mother's uterus. Hence, it would be morally permissible for the mother to get an abortion.

Some pro-lifers respond by saying:

The analogy between the person needing a kidney and pregnancy is not a good analogy. The uterus exists for another person's body. The womb was designed to provide nourishment for another human being. A particular kidney was designed for the particular person who has the kidney. It was not designed for anyone except for the person who has it.

How would pro-choicers respond to the response of the pro-lifers?

An artificially concocted argument pro-choicers would not make,