For the purposes of this thread, I’d like to set one rule.
- the fetus is a living human being
Whether or not you are pro-life or pro-choice, the above holds true for this discussion. I’d like to avoid this thread being hijacked into yet another debate on whether or not it is a human, and at what point it becomes human, so let’s just assume it is a living human being from the moment fertilisation is completed. FTR, I am pro-choice and I do believe the rule I’ve set down.
I hold that a person can not be forced to safe another’s life. They are able to withhold blood, organs, tissue and even their uterus, even though this action may ensure the other person will die.
A mother’s two year old may desperately need a kidney, or a section of liver, or some blood. The mother may be the only compatible person known. I contend that the mother cannot be forced to provide whatever tissue the toddler needs against her will. I also hold that you may think whatever you like about the mother, feel she is completely immoral and even say so, but the fact still holds that if she does not wish to donate her blood, tissue or organs, even if doing so saves a life, she is under no legal obligation to do so.
I also hold this same position for the pregnant woman. She is under no legal obligation to donate the use of her uterus to a fetus/baby. By all means, if the fetus is viable, other people can save it once it’s removed from the uterus, but if the woman no longer wishes to have her uterus used by another human being, she is under no obligation to do so. If it’s too early to save the fetus, unfortunately it will die. If it is viable, others who feel the urge to save it can.