| slab_of_bacon said: The reason there are two different arguments is so that both sides can be considered "right" and people from both sides would then feel validated. However I think that the woman's issue argument would carry much more weight if we treated this as a human issue instead. I mean, what if communities were held responsible for these choices? How would we treat a situation where everyone would feel the same burden? There's an article which asks this question and it makes me wonder... http://www.nuvo.net/GuestVoices/archives/2016/04/14/make-it-their-fight-too |
Indeed, the gentleman brings up a good point about a worst-case scenario of a woman having to carry out a pregnancy alone and without support. It's something anti-abortionists need to consider because, otherwise, it IS inequality.
Presuming that human life is not sacred, it then becomes a question of why human life is important at all? All but the most mentally unstable of our population have an understanding of the value that is in humankind; that is, our accomplishments and our race is what's truly important. The communities we live in are then what need to be taken into consideration when outlawing things like murder.
With that in mind, is it to the benefit of the community to force a young woman to adhere to an unwanted/unprepared pregnancy?
The BuShA owns all!
