Sort:  

Hi Kel, it really depends on the point of view. Some they see the fetus as an individual, and some others not.
I personally think that there is a middle point where after a certain period of the pregnancy, it can be taken as such.
Thank you for commenting.

I identify as a Libertarian, but I always have difficulty fitting it into our present Rep/Dem system. I respect the size and the passion of the pro-lifer contingent, but not the way they can rationalize the violation of the living, citizen mother's rights. I tend to side with the mother. But I also have issues with the father's role. If he's responsible for the future of the child, then his rights have to also be supported, too. Currently, he has little power in the decision. If the State has rights, then the father must have rights, as well.

As a compromise, I think 3rd term abortions could be banned. By that time, the fetus is almost viable outside the womb. Once the mother's rights can be separated from the fetus, the conflict between the rights of the two parties (mother and child) is greatly reduced, as well as the rights of the father and the State.

Opposing abortion as an aggression against individual rights violates a living citizen's rights for that of a future citizen. To me, it's irrational. But I think the current system, where abortion is promoted as an act that has little social shame, is an abomination.

Related to what you say, I always close the loop by saying that the law, will probably not prevent anything to happen. Women committed to do it, will do it anyhow and the alternatives are quite dangerous.
In my homeland, it is illegal, and I always remember a friend of my sister around 13 years old that induced abortion and end it up disable in a wheelchair for the rest of her life.

Whether it is correct or not, I always think that the mother´s final decision is the safest of all.

Thanks for commenting Gray Tail.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.19
TRX 0.13
JST 0.029
BTC 60855.42
ETH 3369.56
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.50