Okay, so then you believe that a person has rights when they can survive outside of the woman. So then the humanity of a fetus depends on location of the mother because in some countries the fetus can be born much earlier due to medical technology. That is not a logical stance.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I believe that the fetus’s right to live doesn’t supersede a person’s right to not be pregnant. That is a logical and consistent stance.

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thats not a logical stance if you dont have a logical point at which the fetus gets rights.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At no point is any person ever required to maintain using their body to keep someone else alive. If it’s your job and you don’t do it you may need professional consequences but never jail.

The fetus has rights but they all fall below that right of bodily autonomy.

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

That is what makes pregnancy a unique situation, another person is required to keep a fetus alive. If the fetus has the right of bodily autonomy, then the consensual act of making it was the consent to carry the fetus 9 months.