three little sparrows

opinionlizard:

emilye:

opinionlizard:

emilye:

Nope.  Merely pointing out the inconsistency in accepting and admitting the truth that her unborn child is a human being while simultaneously supporting the denial of life to other unborn children on the grounds that they aren’t people.

It’s not a matter of denial of personhood. It’s about another organism using someone’s body without consent.

But I’m pretty sure we’re consistent when we repeatedly say “only the pregnant person can decide if the embryo they’re carrying is important.”

Just because someone can look at another human being and convince themselves they’re not really a human being doesn’t make it so.  How a woman sees her child doesn’t have any affect on who and what that child actually is.

Someone can call an embryo their infant all they like in the same manor that someone can call their boyfriend “honey” without said boyfriend actually being honey. Pet names for things you want to get attached to (such as a wanted embryo) exist as a means of bonding.

But even if, for the sake of argument I’m willing to say “sure, there’s an inconsistancy of what pro-choice people say an embryo is.”
What the embryo is is irrelevant.
It’s not a matter of denial of personhood. It’s about another organism using someone’s body without consent.

“Human being” is not a pet name; it is what the embryo is, a member of the race Homo sapiens  Calling a human mere “tissue” or a “clump of cells” are not pet names, and they do not accurately or entirely define what a human wholly is.  Convincing yourself an embryo or fetus isn’t a human being and convincing yourself that an embryo or fetus has no value or worth as a human being is entirely different from adopting pet names for a loved one.  You’re right, calling your boyfriend “honey” does not make him a sticky, sweet substance.  Similarly, calling a developing infant a worthless clot of tissue does not make it the truth.  

“What the embryo is is irrelevant.” — Thank you for getting to the heart of the issue.  If you don’t care what an embryo is, then of course you can justify it’s disposal.

“It’s not a matter of denial of personhood. It’s about another organism using someone’s body without consent.” — The woman’s consent was in the act, not in the result.Pregnancy is a very real, natural physiological process that can result from having sex.  If you don’t want to risk the possibility of creating a human being, then you might not want to risk having sex.  But thanks for taking the time to demonstrate your fundamental divorce from reality.