Same reason we want a Prez with such a cold heart that he'd throw people off of welfare. Or with such a cold heart he'd allow "collatoral damage" to fight a war. 'Conservatives'
That might be a useful analogy here -- in agreeing to fight a war like Iraq, a Prez has to be willing to knowingly condemn innocents to die too. He knows it's inevitable that his actions will directly cause the deaths of innocents. But for a greater purpose, he chooses the 'cold hearted' approach.
Similarly, my thinking is that extending the legal protection of 'citizen' to unborn children would violate what I believe would be a greater purpose -- the freedom of those women to have control over their own bodies. Illegal abortions would force women to go thru a pregnancy they could otherwise end.
Because to me, that's where the 'slavery' analogy falls short. A slave is not also a part of another human being's body.
That's my thinking, anyway. Your mileage may vary. :-D
Similarly, my thinking is that extending the legal protection of 'citizen' to unborn children would violate what I believe would be a greater purpose -- the freedom of those women to have control over their own bodies.
***I fail to see your greater purpose. The woman chooses to engage in the act(that's my presumption, leaving alone any unchosen act) that even 2nd graders know can bring forth a human life. We sacrifice that human life so that the woman can have "control" for a few weeks? If that human life were transferred to another, safer place where he could thrive, that woman has given up nothing but an afternoon and that, my FRiend, is a greater purpose.
Illegal abortions would force women to go thru a pregnancy they could otherwise end.
***That doesn't make sense. Perhaps you mean [Criminalizing abortions]... so I'll respond to that. Yes, the woman now has the legal right to otherwise end that innocent life. 200 years ago, citizens had the legal right to have slaves. We grew up as a country, and extended the right to liberty to those slaves. Now, NO ONE has the right to own a slave and it isn't even perceived as an intrusion. America is slowly coming to the realization that those are babies getting killed, and 90% of them think it would be wise to limit the PBA ghastliness.
Because to me, that's where the 'slavery' analogy falls short. A slave is not also a part of another human being's body.
***True enough. That's why I try to focus discussion on the side of a baby which is viable, because once that baby can survive without the mother, your contention is no longer true in principle.