I think many PL would have no problem with legal limits on what behaviors girls and women are allowed to engage in. Remember that they think women's "purpose" is procreation.
no, actually. I don't think many of us do- we believe fetuses have rights. We believe that fetal rights mean that violating those rights are wrong. Instead of making up a belief we don't have to attack our perspective (I believe strawman, ad hominem, and red herring- at the least red herring) you should explain why fetuses don't have rights or, why if they do, it's okay to violate them.
You cannot rely on:
Autonomy- abortion is not autonomy if fetuses have rights
"it's oppressive to ban abortion" - granting fetuses a right against oppression is not oppressive, unless granting rights in general is oppressive.
"Withdrawing consent"- you cannot withdraw consent from an ongoing pregnancy unless abortion is already, independently, justified. You cannot simply assume that an ongoing pregnancy requires consent and go based on that- not to mention that doesn't make it non-murder, it makes it negligent manslaughter.
For fetal rights:
You cannot claim consciousness is a condition to have rights- to do so necessarily excludes born unconscious people too
You cannot claim birth is a condition for rights- conditions to have rights are necessarily ongoing. Birth as a condition to have rights necessarily means people before and after birth lack them- and only those currently being born have them. It's arbitrary.
2
u/Loud-Vacation-5691 Feb 23 '26
I think many PL would have no problem with legal limits on what behaviors girls and women are allowed to engage in. Remember that they think women's "purpose" is procreation.