Sovereign rites of the body?

Abortion is a woman protecting her body and her interests. Her death may not be emminent, but her life is in danger- her quality of life that is. And should her decision to have sex reduce her rights? I don't think so.

If someone breaks into your house and says to you "You! I'm gonna move in, eat all your food, screw up your sex life, I'm gonna jump on your back and make you uncomfortable and make you feel ugly, I'm gonna make you a social outcast if you're too young or too old, I'll color everyone's perceptions of you. I'm gonna bring a huge health risk, make you stop smoking and drinking even in moderation- no more roller coasters, no more weekends in vegas. I'll make you vomit in the mornings. I'll make your back ache. I'll give you stretchmarks that will linger forever. I'm gonna remind you of that guy, whether you liked him or not. And I'm gonna do this not just for a little while, but for the larger part of a year."

Okay so this guy who just broke into my house and said that to me... how long before I shoot the bastard? And does my right to protect myself end just because I left the window unlocked?

"And when I'm through, I'll be a baby." he says. As if that makes it any better.

+++++++++++++++++++

Your additional comments are warming. I'm glad to get your hackles up, since a debate is more interesting when there is more than one logical arguement.

I know that you believe life begins before birth- and so I must operate within that paradigm. You have also stated that we're discussing solely human rights, and not the other highly important advantages of legalized abortion (like the dramatic decrease in blue collar crime during the Clinton administration; a direct result of Roe v Wade.)

Your added comments indicate strongly your opinion that women who have sex are somehow "asking for it". Rather the same arguement has been used many times to condone date rape, especially when a girl willfully uses drugs or alchohol in an unfamiliar crowd. The defense, in the case of rape, has never held up perhaps because of the terrible nature of the act of rape (or perhaps, the terrible condition of being a rape victim, since the damage is so much farther reaching than just a moment's suffering). You see, a girl simply can't _ask_ for that kind of suffering.

You have commented that my earlier analogy, to be accurate, would require a sign in front of the house that said, to summarize, "asking for it". If she were a 14 year old hooker who went to a man's hotel room high on MDMA, and then passed out, would lessen the man's crimes when he assaulted her?

The comparison isn't all that odd, really. We are talking about the difference between consentual, recreational sex and non-consentual use of a woman's sex organs by another living thing (even if that living thing is her son or daughter to be). It is nessecarily true that sex can be solely recreational, from a moral and legal standpoint. The only strong opposition to this comes, logically enough, from the Catholic Church.

You also ask us, "[Do we say] you must bear some burden for your choices?" Burden is a strong word, sir. Sex is not a crime, notwithstanding that we aren't discussing sin (are we? Sin happens to be my greatest forte.). We're discussing human rights.

By the way, while I realize you are probably only trying to make a point, I feel that it was rather impolite of you to make deliberate mention of my mother.

Well, in response to abortion and the life of the child, we talk about a person's individual rights; but at what age do we determine that a person is 'eligible' to be 'worthy' to receive their rights. According to abortion laws, a human being isn't eligible for human rights until it reaches a certain age in the womb. Well, that's the limit for today; but who knows when the debate will end? Eventually we may determine that a person doesn't qualify for human rights until several months or even years after birth.

Could be possible. One day it could be legally able to kill your 5 year old because he's not 'old enogh' to qualify for human rights.

Everybody should be granted the right to live. Whether they are 23 years old, or in their first trimester.

<*>not

This is the major portion of the answer you referenced:

“he higher purpose in permitting it is to affirm that every person should shall have full jurisdiction over what happens inside the boundaries of his/her body. Therefore by permitting it we are acknowledging that the freedom of a person to control their own body is more important than other considerations. However we are not endorsing the choices they make as "good". We are merely choosing not to intervene forcefully in a person's excersise of thier soverign rights over their body. In this light, persuasion and dialog become the tools of those who wish to stop the practice, not the threat of imprisonment or execution by the government (there are people out there who believe that it is murder and should be punished with death).”

Severity over ones own body has little to do with destroying the body of another just because you have created a situation which caused it to be dependent on you.

I believe that abortion is the second most selfish thing a person can do. Suicide being number 1. You are killing an innocent child. It's like this. What if you saw a parent kill their little 5 moth old baby? Wouldn't you be horrified. A woman who engages in abortion, i just don't know how they live with themselves.

there are so many things out there can can be used to prevent pregnancy, there is little or no excuse for people to engage in sex and not use these things. It is horrible and lazy and selfish for two people to create a living human being and then to kill it simply because they could not take the time 2 minutes to take a birth control pill, or what ever is needed to prevent an unwanted child.

First there really is no legal right, we know that by one vote the Supreme Court of the US made this protection, Which over ruled States rights.

And it is confused even more by the man's rights, if the women wants an abotion, the man has no right, if the women wants to keep it, the man can be required to pay.

Not really equal rights under the law either.

there really is no higher purpose of abotion, it is merely an advanced method of birth control.