LeMew has written a great post on the inescapable logical conclusion of the conservative argument against abortion rights: fetuses are rights-bearing subjects; adult women are not. Superb bit of arguing there; check it out.
One of his (presumably conservative) commenters attacks the premise, with the protestation: “Like it or not, abortion involves a clash of rights. Right to live vs. right to control one's body. Believing that the first should trump in this particular situation does not mean believing that ‘adult women’ have no rights at all. That is just silly.”
(Bemused aside: note the phrase adult women having been put into quotes; I’m not even sure what that’s meant to convey, although there’s clearly no need for them to make his point, such as it is.)
Such a comment (disingenuous though it is, rejecting the implied premise that the rights of fetuses would trump women’s in this situation, as opposed to, say, taking away their right to vote) is indicative of why we need well-argued posts like LeMew’s countering both the inherent flaws and shocking sexism of conservative arguments against abortion rights. We must continue to produce and absorb the passionate, thoughtful posts from feminist bloggers (women and men) who explain why securing abortion rights cannot be flippantly reduced to the “right to control one’s body,” as though the only difference between aborting an unwanted pregnancy and carrying a fetus to term is who makes the decision, rather than two entirely different sets of possible consequences for the person surrounding the womb. Keep arguing choice. Pro-choice is pro-women’s rights.
Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.
blog comments powered by Disqus