Logically the proper amount of legal rights for an embryo is somewhere between none at all and the same rights as an adult. Furthermore, it makes sense for people to either keep their rights as they grow or to gain additional rights as they grow but makes no sense whatsoever for them to **lose** rights as they grow.

These assumptions are necessary to frame any rational debate on this topic. If you can't accept this and demand MORE rights for embryos than you do for adults then you are not arguing honestly. It isn't about legal rights or sanctity of life for you because if it was you'd be willing to accept the assumptions above. It isn't about the children, it is about you and your petty needs to force other people to do what you say. The embryo isn't a human life to you, it is a symbol. More than human. And because it is more than human to you you elevate it above actual people and demand that it get rights that we wouldn't grant anyone else.

There is no reasoning with you in that case because what this is about for you is domination of others. Dress it up all you want, that is what it is about.

For everyone else, back to square one. You don't lose rights over time. You either start with all of them and keep them your entire life or you start with a subset and grow into the rest.

To outlaw abortion you have to award children property rights over their mother's body that supersede her own. To allow abortion in the case of the mother's health you have to limit their property rights to “only if it probably won't kill her” (I say 'probably' since we never really know for sure if a pregnancy is going to be fatal or not and about 600 American women died in labor in 2006 alone ). To maximize women's right in this situation you can also stipulate that the child's right to her body only override her own when their lives are in danger so they can't carve her up for fun, only if they really need to.

This set of laws would outlaw abortion except in the case where the mother's life is at risk ( a healthy rape baby would also be protected … but this isn't about punishing the mother this is about the child, and it isn't the child's fault that it was conceived in rape … right? Rape babies deserve protection to … right? If the mother's choice doesn't matter then it doesn't matter all the time …. right? )

This set of laws would also permit children to demand blood, tissue, and organ donation from their mothers at any point in time, not just during gestation. Your first breath, remember, can grant you additional rights but is can't take any away and in order to outlaw abortion we had to give you rights to your mother's body so you keep those.

I was conceived before roe vs wade to a woman who didn't want me and would have aborted me if she could. She was middle class, which means to poor to travel overseas to take care of her problem and to rich to have back ally contacts.

If I had the right to take of her body to preserve my own life then, and I have all the rights now that I had then, then I should be able to legally compel her to donate me a kidney. To send the police after her and drag her kicking and screaming to the hospital.

This is clearly wrong. I don't think I should have the right to do this to her. My right to life does not extend to taking the flesh of another against their will. So even if embryo-me deserved every right that adult-me has, embryo-me's right to life does not extend to forced gestation. The idea that me-as-an-embryo should be allowed to take of her body but me-as-an-adult doesn't is just bizarre.

As a mindless hunk of cells I wasn't really any loss. I didn't know what I was missing. I had no sense of self, no loves, no passions, no hunger for life. As a middle aged wife with children to care for I have all these things. I am more valuable now than I was then. If only one of us, me-now or me-then, gets the right to another person's body in order to survive it should be me NOW!

The correct answer, of course, is that neither of us has that right. If I can't get a voluntary, willing, ***donation***, the ***gift*** of life, then I will die. Withholding that gift doesn't make anyone a murderer. Same for embryo-me or embryo-anyone.

Trying to make pregnancy magically different than other gifts of life trivializes motherhood and attacks the basic premise of family.

The last connection I had to my mother shattered when I realized that she was coerced into bearing me. Until then I at least had base gratitude for existence and felt I owed her for everything I had cost her. But when you robbed her of choice you removed any reason for gratitude. She didn't spend 17 hours in the bloody bed of labor because she loved me, she didn't voluntarily give up her dream job to raise me, she did it because YOU made her. *I* owe her nothing for it. YOU DO.

This realization allowed me to turn my back on her, move, and change my phone number. It dissolved all ties of family and obligation. I was, after all, a “little tyke who didn't ask to be born”. Her misery isn't my fault and I refuse to be subjected to it. Life is to short for that and I've wasted enough time with it already.

I suppose I owe you people for forcing her to produce me. I am, after all, really the child of the pro-life movement as I wouldn't be here without your meddling. But what you did was wrong and I am ashamed to have benefited from it. It would have been better to let her wait till she was ready and willing to be a Mom. In other situations she might have been a good one. You poisoned our relationship the moment you forced her hand. I pity her, but I HATE pro-life meddlers.

Anti-Choice is Anti-Family.

Support strong, loving families by supporting reproductive Choice.

Logically the proper amount of legal rights for an embryo is somewhere between none at all and the same rights as an adult. Furthermore, it makes sense for people to either keep their rights as they grow or to gain additional rights as they grow but makes no sense whatsoever for them to **lose** rights as they grow.

These assumptions are necessary to frame any rational debate on this topic. If you can't accept this and demand MORE rights for embryos than you do for adults then you are not arguing honestly. It isn't about legal rights or sanctity of life for you because if it was you'd be willing to accept the assumptions above. It isn't about the children, it is about you and your petty needs to force other people to do what you say. The embryo isn't a human life to you, it is a symbol. More than human. And because it is more than human to you you elevate it above actual people and demand that it get rights that we wouldn't grant anyone else.

There is no reasoning with you in that case because what this is about for you is domination of others. Dress it up all you want, that is what it is about.

For everyone else, back to square one. You don't lose rights over time. You either start with all of them and keep them your entire life or you start with a subset and grow into the rest.

To outlaw abortion you have to award children property rights over their mother's body that supersede her own. To allow abortion in the case of the mother's health you have to limit their property rights to “only if it probably won't kill her” (I say 'probably' since we never really know for sure if a pregnancy is going to be fatal or not and about 600 American women died in labor in 2006 alone ). To maximize women's right in this situation you can also stipulate that the child's right to her body only override her own when their lives are in danger so they can't carve her up for fun, only if they really need to.

This set of laws would outlaw abortion except in the case where the mother's life is at risk ( a healthy rape baby would also be protected … but this isn't about punishing the mother this is about the child, and it isn't the child's fault that it was conceived in rape … right? Rape babies deserve protection to … right? If the mother's choice doesn't matter then it doesn't matter all the time …. right? )

This set of laws would also permit children to demand blood, tissue, and organ donation from their mothers at any point in time, not just during gestation. Your first breath, remember, can grant you additional rights but is can't take any away and in order to outlaw abortion we had to give you rights to your mother's body so you keep those.

I was conceived before roe vs wade to a woman who didn't want me and would have aborted me if she could. She was middle class, which means to poor to travel overseas to take care of her problem and to rich to have back ally contacts.

If I had the right to take of her body to preserve my own life then, and I have all the rights now that I had then, then I should be able to legally compel her to donate me a kidney. To send the police after her and drag her kicking and screaming to the hospital.

This is clearly wrong. I don't think I should have the right to do this to her. My right to life does not extend to taking the flesh of another against their will. So even if embryo-me deserved every right that adult-me has, embryo-me's right to life does not extend to forced gestation. The idea that me-as-an-embryo should be allowed to take of her body but me-as-an-adult doesn't is just bizarre.

As a mindless hunk of cells I wasn't really any loss. I didn't know what I was missing. I had no sense of self, no loves, no passions, no hunger for life. As a middle aged wife with children to care for I have all these things. I am more valuable now than I was then. If only one of us, me-now or me-then, gets the right to another person's body in order to survive it should be me NOW!

The correct answer, of course, is that neither of us has that right. If I can't get a voluntary, willing, ***donation***, the ***gift*** of life, then I will die. Withholding that gift doesn't make anyone a murderer. Same for embryo-me or embryo-anyone.

Trying to make pregnancy magically different than other gifts of life trivializes motherhood and attacks the basic premise of family.

The last connection I had to my mother shattered when I realized that she was coerced into bearing me. Until then I at least had base gratitude for existence and felt I owed her for everything I had cost her. But when you robbed her of choice you removed any reason for gratitude. She didn't spend 17 hours in the bloody bed of labor because she loved me, she didn't voluntarily give up her dream job to raise me, she did it because YOU made her. *I* owe her nothing for it. YOU DO.

This realization allowed me to turn my back on her, move, and change my phone number. It dissolved all ties of family and obligation. I was, after all, a “little tyke who didn't ask to be born”. Her misery isn't my fault and I refuse to be subjected to it. Life is to short for that and I've wasted enough time with it already.

I suppose I owe you people for forcing her to produce me. I am, after all, really the child of the pro-life movement as I wouldn't be here without your meddling. But what you did was wrong and I am ashamed to have benefited from it. It would have been better to let her wait till she was ready and willing to be a Mom. In other situations she might have been a good one. You poisoned our relationship the moment you forced her hand. I pity her, but I HATE pro-life meddlers.

Anti-Choice is Anti-Family.

Support strong, loving families by supporting reproductive Choice.

http://ineedakidney.wordpress.com/about/

———-
I wanted to write this blog to inform you about my need for a kidney. At the core of this argument, I have to be completely selfish – it’s me who’s asking for the kidney. But I also hope to inform you about the thousands of people who wait, and die waiting, for a kidney transplant …

… The average wait time on a transplant list in California is within the 10-year range (especially for us O blood types). I have a family – a wife Rebecca, a step-daughter Wallace, and another daughter on the way Violete [now born!]. I have a great job. I have almost everything any guy could ask for.

I need a kidney.
—————————-

People die every day, legally, for lack of donated flesh that we as a society could provide. But we as a society recognize this little thing called property rights and we recognize that one's body is one's property. Period. No if's, no ands, no buts. It is your body. No means no. If the price of that is another person's life then so be it.

Organ donation, blood donation, tissue donation, and embryo gestation are the “gift” of life, not the government mandated flesh tax. At least not in a free society.

Somplace like China might be more your speed. They LOVE letting the government run family planning for people and controlling their reproductive lives.

There is vast legal precedent for using lethal force to protect ones home and person. If an embryo can be a person, it can also be a criminal.

I have a favorite conundrum that I like my right-to-life friends
ponder. “You see a building on fire and hear a young girl crying to be
saved. You enter the building and are confronted with one big room – a
fertility laboratory. On one side of the room, you see a
three-year-old girl, crying and begging. On the other side you see a
tray of two dozen fertilized ova. You can only rescue one. Which do
you choose?”

- Blue Sun

/”Religion is based . . . mainly upon fear . . . fear of the mysterious,
fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and
therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand
. . . . My own view on religion is that of Lucretius. I regard it as a
disease born of fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race.”
/
–Bertrand Russell