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.
For up to 8 months, actually. And the time isn't even the point. Going thru the experience of pregnancy should not be forced, when there are other options.
Now if we had a technology that could remove the fetus from the beginning, and then that fetus could be transferred to an artificial womb, and then that fetus could be adopted later -- that would be fine, to me. The procedure to the mother would be little different than an abortion.
But until that time, I don't support making abortions illegal, personally.
Again, to me, this life is such an undeveloped state that ending it is no big deal.
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.
I disagree. Again, it has nothing to do with 'viability', in my mind. It has to do with the state of development of the human mind.
I'm certainly no expert on the subject. But up until some point, the human brain is less developed than that of a dog. So to me, killing that human brain would be little different than killing a dog. Not something you'd want to do, but if you decided it had to be done, then you'd do it.
To me, humans are just animals. The highest life-form on the planet so far, but still just animals.