The pro-abortion bodily autonomy argument hinges on a fetus not being human.
A man does not have full ownership over his body if he chooses to rape a woman because his actions directly impact another human person.
If mere ownership over your body was enough, then the act of raping is justifiable. But because a woman is a person, a man does not have a right to create whatever type of violence he pleases with his body.
If a fetus is human, then likewise, a woman does not have a right to initiate violence even within her own body, as those actions directly impact another separate human soul.
The argument stands that a fetus must not be a human person. Because if the baby is a person, then it is a death that goes against a basic moral order that most all can agree.
You cannot rape. You cannot kill.
Unless, of course, the argument starts to shift over to a more non-mainstream view of abortion rights, which is that the death of the baby is necessary for a woman to have access to the full rights of personhood.
Men have only possessed these rights of personhood up until the Roe v Wade point in our history.
He has had free, unfettered access to his sexuality without restraint. The control over his body has meant that he has been able to pursue his dreams in a way womenkind never could, without any responsibility to the natural outcome of acting on his sexuality.
The realities of his biology have never enslaved him. So to have the bonds of womankind's slavery broken, she must too have free, unfettered access to her sexuality without restraint.
Therefore, a woman must have the right to choose death for her child.
Though this argument seems like it might be more in a fringe position, the reality is that it is rising in popularity.
It is a form of backward justice (rather an injustice) when society allows a woman to violate basic moral order, giving her the right to strip someone of their humanity as a means for her to gain her own.
For society to be truly just, equal human value must begin at conception, which is the only point in human development that is not established by man but by science.
Two cells come together, and at that moment, scientifically, it is no longer one thing but something else entirely different. If the line is drawn at the heartbeat, he is still foundationally the same thing from before there is a detectable heartbeat to the moment after. If the line is drawn at viability, he is the same from the moment he could not function independently from his mother to the moment he could. If it is at first breath, he is likewise still the same scientifically from one moment to the next.
Society can draw these lines within the womb, justifying denial of fundamental rights and even the right to life itself, or it can't. If mankind has this right to draw lines for human value within the womb, it can also do so outside.
Essentially, justice is powered either fully by autonomy or requires recognizing another human person's mutual and equal value. But the sad state of reality is, bodily autonomy will continue to be invoked, ignoring science altogether because it is not about truth. It is not about justice. It is not even about empowering women.
It is about control over women for profit.
Our President, Nicole Smith, founded Dignity Defense Institute out of the genuine desire to remind humanity of its immeasurable worth. No man, culture, or society has the right to design systems of measurement for human value. Whether it is slavery, genocide, or beyond, DDI will stand in the gap for truth. We will shine a light on all the atrocities of yesterday and today so that these crimes against humanity will not be the reality of tomorrow. Stand in the gap with us. Consider joining our mailing list or making a tax-deductible donation today!
Comments