Reply #102: Hell, Flame Away.

[outinforce]

I'm used to it.

You identify what I see as the problem confronting an expansion of reproductive rights to parents -- the legal fact that "Once a child is born (maybe that's not what you're talking about), I do believe it has all the basic rights afforded all human beings"

I understand that, too -- but only that the law considers a "born child" as having all the rights afforded to all human beings".

I just think the law is wrong.

Why is it, exactly, that a newborn -- unable to feed itself, clothe itself, care for itself in any meaningful manner, and unable to express itself except by crying -- why is it, exactly, that anyone should consider such a newborn to be a "person" with all the same rights you or I have?

My own expectation is that as our society becomes more and more progressive, we will come to understand that enduing newborns with "personhood" really does restrict the rights of adults to choose whether or not they really do want to bring another life into this world.