Unborn Children Have No Human Rights

I'm planning to become a law student in future, and due to that I have already started to study the basics of the basics on my own, buying books that have been material in entrance exams in past years. The book I have slowly spelled the last few weeks is about human rights and how they are linked to the constitutional law. (In my country, mind you. And I don't live in the USA.)

A chapter that I recently finished defined to whom these rights belong. Without translating an extract, the textbook implied that human rights are to be guaranteed for every individual person during their lifetime, in which ”lifetime” means from their birth to their death. Thus, unborn children have no rights as humans and an abort is not considered to be a murder.

To me this seems to be a core of the question: there are people who consider fetus to be an individual that should be treated as a human, and those who don't. The argument is there, and I guess there is no more facts in that aspect, just opinions. At this point someone might pull out scientific research about fetuses reacting to stimulation from the outside word, such as music. That proves that they are indeed alive and sense their surroundings, but might not fulfill a definition of ”individual person”, so nothing has been solved.

The rights of the mother seem to be a hot topic when talked about abortion, meaning that because the fetus is inside mother's body, the mother should have rights to erase it if that is what she wants. So, mother's rights versus child's rights. (The thing that really puzzles me is when someone says abortion is okay when the mother is raped or, in some cases, when the contraceptives means fail. Does that mean not allowing an abortion is a punishment for mother being a ”****”, or don't children conceived accidentally or against mother's will have no rights?)

Then there is the social aspect and consequences. ”It is estimated that 20 million unsafe abortions occur around the world annually and that 70,000 of these result in the woman's death.” (Source: Wikipedia. Geez, makes me embarrassed.) And that doesn't even mention the damage done to internal organs.

I assume that, if abortion is not an option, many unwilling mothers give their child to adoption? I have no idea how many aborts are done in this or that country yearly, but these children have to taken care of somehow. Are there really parents available for all of them, or will they be put to an orphanage? That will cost money, whether it will be taken out of taxes or payed by an individual, which sounds like pretty bad idea.

The world has no shortage of humans, and even though some countries have or will soon develop problems because of the reversed population pyramid, that is handled easier with means of immigration. I guess abortion has a sunny future from the legal point of view.
Fearofsilence Fearofsilence
18-21, F
4 Responses Aug 7, 2010

ALL questions regarding law and enforcement MUST be regarded primarily within the interest of THE STATE. In other words, what philosophers, etc. might offer as 'proof' is NOT relevant. The state must set criteria which is then enforced ba<x>sed upon the secular goals of the institution. <br />
In other words, if paying for birth/foster care/ education is a WINNING proposition for the state, then the stae has a LEGAL obligation to it's people to decide AGAINST abortion...<br />
<br />
If, on the other hand, there is proof that the burden (of cost) would be upon the state, and that statistically it could be proved that the births are a strain upon the state (and hence taxpayers).. then the sste MUST decide upon the most cost effective alternative to birth, etc..<br />
If this means abortion, then so be it.

Courts have ruled that human rights don't necessarily begin at birth nor end at death. The Supreme Court of Wisconsin ruled in 2008 that a corpse can still be considered a "person" under assault statutes and must give consent for sex acts. Fetuses are considered persons under homicide statutes in many states, though exceptions are given in the case of abortion. I don't know where Shyle38 gets their information, but I believe it to be wrong.

A world of wanted children is a better world indeed.<br />
<br />
Studying law, eh? Here in the USA, the supreme court ruled that the unborn is a legal nonperson, and technically a part of the woman's body until born. Granting legal personhood to unborn embryos and blastocysts is more complicated than many think. We'd have to count them in the census. We'd have to count them as tax deductions. And women with miscarriages would be subject to manslaughter charges. That's a biggie, since 1 in 5 fertilized eggs fail to survive anyway. It sounds absurd to throw women in jail for not getting enough folic acid, but if the law is written carelessly enough, that's what can happen.<br />
<br />
Then there is the social aspect and consequences. ”It is estimated that 20 million unsafe abortions occur around the world annually and that 70,000 of these result in the woman's death.” Yup. and outlawing abortion doesn't even reduce the incidence of abortions; it merely sends it underground where it is more deadly for the mothers. Rather than reducing abortions, it only makes women's lot worse. Want to hold back womankind? Want to keep the glass ceiling low? Keep abortion illegal. Force them to become mothers instead of whatever other plans they have for their lives. Pregnant teens drop out of school, are less educated, and earn less income. Abortion is outlawed in about 75 countries, and there's a pretty good correlation between poverty and abortion restrictions. <br />
<br />
Perversely, many countries that outlaw abortion have more abortions. <br />
* In Chile, there are 41 abortions per 1000 women each year. Abortion is banned.<br />
* In the USA, there are 17 abortions per 1000 women each year. Abortion is increasingly limited and difficult to obtain.<br />
* In the Netherlands, there are 7 abortions per 1000 women each year. Abortion on demand has little restriction. <br />
<br />
For us defenders of abortion the question isn't "Is abortion wrong?" The question is "Should abortion be legal?" And our answer is absolutely yes.

This is a fear mongering that I have encountered in more than one pro-choice argument. I think it is silly to say that women will be subjected to manslaughter charges. I do not see women (or men for that matter) charged with manslaughter if they walk up stairs holding their infant and fall. I don't see manslaughter charges being brought up against parents in car accidents (alcohol and drug use maybe.)
I also don't see the story as saying they support a pro-life platform, she is simply saying that she is seeing that there is a valid argument for both sides.
And to throw some stats to you....Ireland, a country that has banned abortions, has a lower maternal mortality rate than the U.S a country with legalized abortion.
We MUST question whether abortion is "wrong" because it involves human life (both ways). Get used to it.

The lower maternal mortality rate has more to to with the fact that Ireland is among the many countries that have better healthcare systems than the US, rather than the abortion issue.

The Republic of Ireland isn't the best example because of its unique political boundary situation. Many women there who want abortions can travel north to the UK in North Ireland, where abortion is legal. The result of this ban is that the more well off women can manage to get their abortions and on with their lives. Teenagers, poor women, or otherwise troubled Irish women who lack the wherewithal to get to the UK for an abortion appointment are stuck with children they are unprepared or unwilling to raise, and those children have a much worse aptitude that makes society worse off wherever abortion is banned. Abortion rights make human life better. Violent crime in the US has been plummeting since 1991 because the next generation of American criminals were never born, thanks to Roe v. Wade back in 1973. Unwanted children are not well cared for, have unmotivated parents, adn are born into extremely dysfunctional families, which predisposes them to crime.

Forget Ireland and look at the big picture:
http://www.economist.com/images/20070519/CIR991.gif
The reds aren't doings so well.

Keeping abortion legal makes human life better by giving it quality over quantity. I'm over it.

Personally I feel abortion is wrong.<br />
Life begins at conception not at 3,6,9,12 weeks of gestation.<br />
It isn't called a termination for nothing,it is precisely that : A termination of life.<br />
Some people might say I'm backward and zealout Christian but I am neither.<br />
My opinion used to be stoically Pro-choice & Women's rights but after extensive reading on the topic and having an ex- Partner who was required to do 2 week 'stints' in the Hopsital's clinic,share his first hand experiences with me,I became seriously Pro-life.<br />
One has to question moral integrity when more abortions are performed in my country (where contraception is freely available) than infants carried to term.With a Goverment who pays us $5000 to have a child!

"Trees have rights but unborn babies don't" is a favorite lie of mine.