[Peace-discuss] Emergency contraception

[C. G. Estabrook]

Are you convinced (perhaps from faith) that it's not a person with rights
at three, six, or nine months? --CGE


On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Morton K.Brussel wrote:

> > "...how many people with
> > rights are involved -- one, or two??
> 
> Carl persists in using the word "people" (person) for a fertilized egg 
> perhaps not an hour old. The silliness of this is apparent to most, but 
> not to those who want to impose their peculiar (god given?) morality on 
> the non-silly.
> 
> MKB
> 
> On Oct 15, 2004, at 8:21 AM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> 
> > I don't own my own body, Bob -- I *am* my own body.  The capitalist
> > metaphor seems to me out of place and even dangerous. (E.g., if I own 
> > my
> > own body, am I open -- perhaps literally -- to eminent domain?)
> >
> > I'll join you in your declaration for Locke, the Enlightenment, and 
> > women
> > -- I'm sure they'll all be delighted to have our support.  But, as the
> > tension in your own argument (between kidney and unwelcome guest)
> > suggests, the fundamental question about abortion is, how many people 
> > with
> > rights are involved -- one, or two?
> >
> > Best, Carl
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Bob Illyes wrote:
> >
> >> I want to second what Susan said, and add a few comments.
> >>
> >> About 300 years ago, John Locke wrote his second treatise on civil
> >> government, an early and seminal development of the concept of human
> >> rights, and one which lead to the rights presented in the Declaration
> >> of Independence and the American Bill of Rights. Locke is sometimes
> >> criticized for proposing "property-based" rights. But the fundamental
> >> property he built rights on was the property in ones own body. Since
> >> women have achieved full citizenship, they also legally own their own
> >> bodies. It is no more legally correct to demand that a woman be
> >> powerless to terminate a pregnancy than it is to demand that I be
> >> forced to give a kidney to save the life of someone I do not wish to
> >> give it to.
> >>
> >> Let's be clear here- we're arguing not about whether a fertilized ovum
> >> is a person or not, but about whether a woman owns her own body. Only
> >> if she doesn't can we properly argue about whether or not her body
> >> should be occupied by an unwelcome guest. Even if there were consensus
> >> that a fertilized ovum were a person, which there definitely is not,
> >> that personhood would give the ovum no claim on another's body.
> >>
> >> I declare for Locke, for the Enlightenment, and for woman.
> >>
> >> Bob
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Peace-discuss mailing list
> > Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
> > http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> >
> 
>