Never mind that taking yourself somewhere to get the child gutted out of your stomach is still legal, since when is the inability to bring a fetus to term now a crime demanding state-sponsored revenge upon the woman who’s probably mourning her broken pregnancy in the first place?
Seriously, if a woman miscarries, it implies that she intended to bear the baby in the first place. Charging a woman who suffered a miscarriage with murder is like adding insult to injury, only with a vicious angle that implies that the miscarriage was the insult that deserved injury to be inflicted.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
There’s a further frightening thing going on here. And it’s an issue that seems to lie underneath the pro-life stance, whether we’re just talking merely dislike of the procedure itself (Plan B pill OK, Vacuum cleaner into the inner sanctum not) or taking the full Quiver-Full approach (The word “NO,” stated at a specific time to a specific request, is an abortifacient).
It’s this: does a pregnant woman have any rights?
If you believe that a fetus has rights because it exists, then by dint of its dependence on the mother the fetus does away with many (if not all) the rights that a woman has. Never mind drinking or drugging, the mother-to-be now has to do everything with the fetus in sole mind. Little else matters, unless there’s other children to be taken care of in the meantime.
Which means: the mother-to-be must rearrange her life to fit in with the demands of the fetus. The mother-to-be has no rights by herself BECAUSE the fetus within her trumps whatever claims the mother-to-be has by dint of the fetus’s existence and dependence on the mother-to-be.
And if a baby gets born before (s)he’s able to survive without help?
If the article listed on top of this blog posting (and reposted here) is any indication, the woman has done a grave sin, a sin so grave that it is allowed for the state to heap their own punishment upon the woman.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
And you get a real problem when you decide to define a human being NOT as a fetus, but as a fertilized egg.
This is an issue because a large proportion of fertilized eggs do not become full-fledged fetuses. Some don’t implant, others abort themselves (due to unfitness of the genome), and still others fail due to outside pressures (…and not JUST from “actions from women who poison their wombs.” I could yell at the woman, and if she feels threatened enough it may affect her ability (and willingness) to welcome new life into her.). Add to that the delay between fertilization and implantation, and you have a lot of leeway in which to play around with stuff. Like declaring that a woman is doing stuff to insure that she’s unable to implant any possible fertilized eggs after (a possible) fertilization.
I can easily see women being punished for not bearing children (what are you doing to kill them?). I can also see rights being withdrawn simply because there women aren’t considered as beings in and of themselves but merely vessels. After all, why let women get educated when there is a direct causation between higher education levels and smaller families?
This is the path that the pro-life movement is taking the nation. Which is why don’t count myself as an anti-abortion advocate.
Even with my discomfort with Abortion (something many pro-choice/pro-abortion types share; it’s this natural discomfort that gives the pro-life/anti-abortion movement its advantages), I’m not ready to go down the path that many anti-abortion people have already gone down (without admitting it). I’m not ready to define everything as responsibilities without rights (even though this society seems hell-bent to remove both ideas from its lexicon, from what I’ve seen).