Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Are "pro-lifers" okay with allowing rape if stopping him would involve murder?
There is a concept called body autonomy. Its generally considered a human right. Bodily autonomy means a person has control over who or what uses their body, for what, and for how long. Its why you can’t be forced to donate blood, tissue, or organs. Even if you are dead. Even if you’d save or improve 20 lives. It’s why someone can’t touch you, have sex with you, or use your body in any way without your continuous consent. If a man had sex with a woman and she later withdrew consent, but he continued anyway, that would be rape. If shooting him was the only way to stop him, most conservatives would be okay with that. Why does the same logic not apply to fetuses?
A fetus is using someone’s body parts. Therefore under bodily autonomy, it is there by permission, not by right. It needs a persons continuous consent. If they deny and withdraw their consent, the pregnant person has the right to remove them from that moment. A fetus is equal in this regard because if I need someone else’s body parts to live, they can also legally deny me their use. By saying a fetus has a right to someone’s body parts until it’s born, despite the pregnant person’s wishes, you are doing two things.
1. Granting a fetus more rights to other people’s bodies than any born person.
2. Awarding a pregnant person less rights to their body than a corpse.
"A fetus is there by permission? The fetus didn't ask to be put there by someone who didn't want him/her ." Nor did the mother ask for the fetus to be there.
8 Answers
- sO*happyLv 58 years agoFavorite Answer
You're equating a fetus to an organ, not a person with it's own rights to its own body. So really, you're contradicting your own argument...
- Anonymous8 years ago
The only time I believe abortion is ever okay
is in cases like that of Savita Halappanavar, where the
mothers survival is in clear danger. Rape is a grey area,
I know, but you can give the baby up for adoption.
If the baby was created by consensual sex, then abortion in my eyes
is selfish and wrong.
Copying and pasting an article makes you look stupid by the way.
- Prophet Of DoomLv 58 years ago
That's the question - is a fetus a body part or another living thing. Does a mother have a right to destroy it because it's inconvenient?
Is it a life, even potentially?
You skip all of that, and your "autonomy" might very well apply to the fetus as well.
Consider.
- AnonLv 78 years ago
Their has only been a few cases about rape causing births anyways I think abortion should be safe and legal so long as its used for emergencies.
Source(s): Pro-Life - How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Sherry SmithLv 78 years ago
No and that's about the dumbest argument I've ever heard. A fetus is there by permission? The fetus didn't ask to be put there by someone who didn't want him/her. He/she had no say in the matter.
- Steven EwingLv 78 years ago
Of course not, just be sure you kill him during the rape to qualify justifiable homicide.
- 8 years ago
pro-lifers are christian bigots. they dont care about women, they're stupid bible condemns women anyways. if that person wants to get rid of their unborn child, LET THEM. its their choice, not your religiously clouded mind's.
