The expanding child argument is so dumb. Why is she attacking an innocent child to save her life? The child is growing… No duh, that’s what they do. She could just take care of a child or not put herself in a dangerous situation in the first place. This whole video is just a justification for allowing our own personal desires to do what we would like to usurp morality. Seems like we constantly confuse the term liberty, which means freedom, with the word license, which means we do what we want. In the case of rape or some sort of deformity I totally get and justify abortion. But do you realize that we have uplifted sex over and above life in our society? That’s sick! Additionally, whether you care to admit or not, it only further substantiates that the ideas Christians hold of abstinence before marriage are valid.
I think you kinda missed the idea. There 3 questions you need to ask yourself first. Is a fetus consider a baby? does a baby life has more rights to live than a woman has rights on her body's autonomy? And does disconnecting from you someone who is depanding on you to live is the same as killing?
Agreed. The basic concepts of the argument are flawed. The baby has a claim right(if it is a person) and mother has a duty to fulfill the child’s right under the law. The mother only has the privilege to an abortion if there is no claim (ie the fetus is not a person). This is called the hosfeld’s theory of rights and privilege and is universally accepted and the basis for most modern jurisprudence in most countries.
@@christophervaughan1 the fetus having a right to life does not mean it has a right to be kept alive by someone’s body against their will, and it doesn’t follow from that point that women should be PUNISHED for removing the fetus from inside them, especially when that would not apply to any other person or situation
@@vvieites001 it means precisely that legally, the fetus (we are assuming that it is a person)has a constitutionally guaranteed right to life and the mother has an duty to fulfill that right. In the same way that a private property owner has the right to not have people on the property and you have a duty to fulfill that right. That’s the way rights work and I’m sorry the right to an abortion is nowhere in the constitution. Now if you’d like to argue that fetuses don’t have rights because they haven’t been born and the constitution doesn’t apply, this becomes a slippery slope. Can I shoot an illegal immigrant?( for the record I’m also against that) They also have no rights constitutionally and your logic makes them fair game.
