View Single Post
Old 03-15-2004, 05:44 PM   #10
Slartibartfast
|-0-| <-0-> |-0-|
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 516
You really seem to hammer the point that the fetus is a parasite.

Yes, by definition, the fetus is a parasite, but it is not just a parasite. It seems to be a rather significant parasite because if we destroyed all of them and never allowed any of them to latch onto us, the species as a whole would die. The parent/offspring relationship is a little more complex than just calling the offspring a parasite on its host. We can happily destroy all tapeworms that latch onto people, but we cannot do the same for all fetuses, at least not without dire consquences for the human race. Your comparison is not valid. A tapeworm is forever a tapeworm; that fetus is something with far more potential.

Tell a happy expecting mother she is carrying just a parasite inside her. Isn't it obvious it is far more than just that?

Should it have rights greater than that of the mother? No, that should be obvious.

Should it have equal rights with the mother? This point we can debate all you want.

Should it have no rights whatsoever? It is a human individual, it should be treated with dignity and respect. You could argue that the rights of the mother over her body superscede the rights of a fetus to live, but you can't argue that the fetus should have no rights whatsoever.
Slartibartfast is offline   Reply With Quote