View Single Post
  #81  
Old 10-15-2018, 08:03 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie-Xmas View Post
Davis v. Davis

To sum it up: A divorcing couple with frozen embryos. She wanted to carry them to term, he wanted them destroyed. The final court battle ended up with them being destroyed.
Thank you for that but how do we square the difference between the op circumstance and my hypothetical in light of that?

In one a woman is assaulted in order to destroy the entity within her to prevent that entity from becoming a fully formed human and that attempted destruction is called attempted homicide.

In the other a building is broken into and entered with in order to destroy similar entities to prevent any of them from becoming fully formed humans.

Destruction of those entities is otherwise allowed when not part of another separate crime.


Defining this crime as homicide validates the perspective of those against abortion rights. It defines the entity in question as a person. It frames discussion in the way it is being framed here, with defenses of why it is okay to kill a person in the context of abortion.

Fetal or even embryonic personhood is something the anti-abortion crowd would love to have be the frame. A debate about what right one person has to live, to continue to exist, and how much that trumps another person's rights to something less existential as life itself? That the anti-Choice frame of discussion. I do not accept that frame.