Yay! Another discussion about abortion!
I just added my two-cents to a discussion happening on Facebook about whether or not abortion is morally right, and where does life begin, etc etc... and I realized there is hypocrisy in this idea that a woman is obligated to carry a fetus if she becomes pregnant with it.
So, instead of launching into why or why not abortion itself is permissible, and under what circumstances, let's debate about something entirely different with this in the back of our minds: if a woman is obligated to sacrifice her body because the fetus has a right to life, it follows we should all be obligated blood-and-organ donors because others have a right to life as well. And I'm serious. I know I'm introducing this first as an abortion issue, I want you all to form an opinion about something else.
Don't you feel good about yourself when you donate blood? Wouldn't you feel proud if you were able to save a family member's life by giving them one of your kidneys? Gosh, your blood type was a perfect match to that poor little girl with leukemia and so you want to give bone marrow! How about some plasma? Just think of all the things you could give and live without to save another life... ~warm fuzzies~
Now imagine the government coming in and demanding you donate all those things you can live without. Sure, that kidney might come in handy when you are diagnosed with cancer, but let's worry about that later. People are dying! They need your body to survive! Literally, the government wants you to give it your lifeblood. Not just once, either. However many times you can give in a year, you're required to check in and give it up... you know, for those people that have a right to live, nevermind it's at your expense.
So think about that. It's for the greater good. You don't need any of that to live. Well, and hopefully you'd get it back when you were in a similar state of need. Do you think the government should be able to force people to give up their bodily autonomy for the sake of "the greater good", whatever that really means?
Does saving another life justify the pillaging of another's body?
Stay on topic, kiddos! No rabbit trails about why you think abortion is right or wrong, just stick to the issue about being forced to donate organs/blood, etc. :D
This just in: someone on Twitter submitted a link to the Vatican's thoughts on bodily autonomy. I thought it was ironic and wonder why people don't make this connection.
Exactly, I get to choose when and with whom to share my body, whether sexually, for reproduction, or bodily donations. This is not just a woman's issue, either.
Borrow? Without permission? A person would be irritated if a neighbor came to borrow their lawn mower without their permission! Who's okay with people borrowing without asking? That is a weak justification. Also, if someone does borrow something of yours, you expect them to return it in good condition. There is no way a woman's body is going to be "returned" in the same condition.
In a culture so fixated on sexual attractiveness, the condition of a woman's body is sometimes her greatest asset... and it's nauseating to realize that, after childbirth, her body becomes obsolete. This might be slightly less infuriating if people revered women's bodies after childbirth, rather than reviling them. Further, it's not just her attractiveness that is diminished. Her body functions are greatly compromised. Forever.
So this "borrowing" notion is ridiculous... obviously. :)
This is an issue when you are required to support other people even when it does not involve giving up organs or years of service. If you think about it, even having to pay taxes that are just going to be given to someone as a transfer payment (welfare, social security, medicare, food stamps, et. al.), are requiring you to give up the time you spent earning the money, just as a draft requires you to give up two years of your life (and possibly a great deal of wear and tear) and a pregnancy requires giving up nine months (even assuming the baby is put up for adoption) and a lot of wear and tear.
Well, there's that. There's morning sickness, the emotional changes the pregnancy hormones cause, sometimes postpartum depression after the 9 months. Childbirth can be excruciating, it can tear their parts, sometimes it won't come out naturally and they have to cut the woman open. They have to miss work. Plus there's the risk of childbirth killing or seriously injuring the mother if there's complications. It would be a cruel thing, in my opinion, to make someone carry that in their bodies for 9 months, go through the pain of childbirth, having everyone know you're pregnant, possibly facing social stigma because you're not married or are a teenager, and after all that either give it up for adoption, essentially going through all that in a sense for nothing. Not being a part of your child's life, or you have to take care of it, which sucks up another 18+ years of time, energy, finances, etc. Having a child is big, much bigger than 'borrowing' something, like a lawnmower, and it has long term consequences.
When the US government instituted that most vile of slavery called the military draft
Really? That is the most vile form of slavery?
And for the record, I just want to borrow women's bodies for a few minutes at a time.
Really, so those that burned the draft cards did they fight? I doubt it.
Government has no place telling people how, when, where and why to use their bodies.
I agree with you 100%. And the way things are headed in the states, it's only a matter of time before they do demand your blood and organs. Laws like those literally take away any notion of freedom and choice you think you have. Laws like that put the states on par with a dictatorship, and throw you all back to the good ol' Dark Ages, when the catholic church had all the power they want. And history shows us how well that went for everyone.
All in all, the republican party and the church should steal a slogan from Warhammer 40k for their religion. "BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!"
The government doesn't need to force you, they can just say god wants you to do it, back it up with the church, and most people would line up. I don't know how you came up with this parallel but it's very good, even though the argument against abortion rather stems from misogyny than a right to live.
Oh it absolutely stems from misogyny, but I think sometimes people can be jarred into reality when they're able to empathize with the victim. Even in the link from the Vatican I provided, the author felt sympathetic towards an embryo's rights... yet somehow forgot to mention the woman in whose body it resides, and her "humanness". I will never understand the fact that some men fail to see women as human at all. Why do they care about something that doesn't even look human, yet dismiss the rights of their mothers, sisters, wives, etc?
A life time of thinking of women as less than, as existing for men--their pleasure, their service, their incubator. That gooey glob of life inside a woman, well, that might turn out to be a little man. Of course we can relate to an almost human man more than a human woman. Lol, only half serious here.