So the debate once again comes down to "Does a fetus has the same legal rights as a person"
Eeyup. Simply because if we can answer that, we can answer every single other question relating to this. All other issues fall into place based on precedent.
Problem is, no one can really answer it in a satisfactory manner.
Ultimately why I'm on the fence.
I would argue that the potential to be a person does not make one a person, especially as far as the law goes. Take for example citizenship, the fetus is not a member of any nationality until it is born, as such how can we give them the legal rights of that nationality?
Absolutely agreed. Oh, and as far as nationality goes: It's a whole 'nother can of worms, but laws regarding citizenship are totally borked, pretty much worldwide. It annoys me to no end that, for example, the president of the United States needs to be naturally born. Immigration/emmigration, outsourcing, etc are massively overcomplicated and are consequences of us caring way too much where someone "comes from."
I do as well. I personally don't see it as a black-and-white issue, considering that it's rather silly to consider a newborn infant a human life, but not think the same of a viable fetus of 8-9 months, for instance.
Yeah this bugs me too. I've seriously met people who think the umbilical cord defines someone as a person; as if your belly button is intrinsic to your being.
I can't think of anything politically relevant that isn't. It's very much a religion-centric issue here.
I'd argue, for whatever reason, this is a consequence of it being a social issue and it happening to be headed by those who love to put religion in their social issues. Also it's a consequence of sex, and censoring and punishing that is a very common goal of social conservatives.
Once upon a time I'd say the religious arguments were more of a face to bring religious voters on the side of pro-choice. It's now pretty much become that face, at least in the political arena. Don't have anything to back that up, but just my gut feeling.
/shrug
I don't accept the notion of "partial" people with "partial" rights, but that's another viewpoint that might accept your line of thinking.
Even born children have "partial rights". It's a very normal part of our society. Adults have more rights than teenagers and toddlers. Extending this concept to prenatal children (or whatever you want to call them) is less absolutely impossible than you think.
Hehe... Guess what. I'm pretty damn adamantly against such double standards based on age. I don't like arbitrarily labeling people inferior. Any concession I make in that arena (voting ages, parental rights, etc) is due to practicality.
If your point is other people DO carry such opinions, then yeah I know that. It's just never an argument I, personally, will accept. It goes contrary to my most basic moral tenets.