This dude rather have two lives ruined rather than one.
"It's 2013 and I still view the internet on a 560x192 resolution monitor!"
There's other words I want to say right now, but instead, I'm going to just say, kindly kick rocks. If every baby has the right to live according to you, then why isn't every "pro-life" individual championing for medical healthcare for all? Why about properly funded head-start programs? Pre and post natal treatments for not only the individual with the means to do so, but for those who can't. What about common sense gun-regulations so as baby grow into kids, they don't get shot just trying to get an education? Or what about treating our environment so our babies can have a safe place to live as their grow up. You all don't care about the baby once it's born so again, kindly kick rocks trying to justify your hypocrisy to the rest of us.
Besides, the corrupt SCOTUS isn't done with this decision. They want to overturn Griswold which would criminalize contraception. Which would no longer make people "just practice safe sex" anymore. So what now, huh?
Looking for <Good Quotes for Signature>.
In the sense that I, with a hypothetical liver issue, cannot compel or force you, a hypothetical liver haver, to give me a chunk of your liver even if my condition is life threatening. It's the same autonomy that guarantees that corpses can't be forcibly harvested for organs unless the deceased gave a pre-mortem go-ahead. It's also why you can't just pull the plug on someone who's comatose and has zero chance of waking back up without going through extensive legal hurdles.
To pair it down into ugly and clinical terms: The baby cannot survive without the mother, but the mother's bodily autonomy does not - should not - compel her to carry that child to term for much the same reasons.
It's really that simple, mate.
Because someone will die if they're denied your organs or blood. You know, the same way a fetus will die if it's denied the use of a woman's organs and blood.
Once again; bodily autonomy does not entitle anyone to the use of someone else's body to sustain their lives even if that use would enable them to survive. You're not even entitled to a corpse's organs or blood.
So what you're doing here is putting women in a position where they have fewer rights than a dead person. Don't bang on about how you love women when you support them being second class citizens.
Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi