| Line 109: |
Line 109: |
| | ===Right to One's Body=== | | ===Right to One's Body=== |
| | The Pro-Choice movement likes to say that women should have a right to one's body. However, such a right should logically not allow one to harm others with that body, including physical assault, murder, rape, or theft. As Hugh V. McLachlan of Glasgow Caledonian University pointed out in 1997, there is no entitlement to one's body and "we have rights duties, liabilities, restrictions and | | The Pro-Choice movement likes to say that women should have a right to one's body. However, such a right should logically not allow one to harm others with that body, including physical assault, murder, rape, or theft. As Hugh V. McLachlan of Glasgow Caledonian University pointed out in 1997, there is no entitlement to one's body and "we have rights duties, liabilities, restrictions and |
| − | disadvantages as well as rights concerning our own bodies." | + | disadvantages as well as rights concerning our own bodies." {{cquote|"Consider the assumption at issue in the abstract: 'That particular X is your X and, therefore, you are entitled to do what you want with it'. As a matter of pure logic, the claim is an absurdity. What if 'X' stands for a Thompson Machine Gun? Should we say: 'That is your machine gun and, therefore, you can do whatever you like with it?' On the contrary, although there might be some things which you and only you can of right do to and with the gun, if that particular machine gun is your machine gun then it is incumbent upon you in particular to ensure that certain things are not done with it. Is the situation any different when 'X' pertains to one's body or to parts of it? I do not think so." |
| − | {{cquote|"Consider the assumption at issue in the abstract: 'That particular X is your X and, therefore, you are entitled to do what you want with it'. As a matter of pure logic, the claim is an absurdity. What if 'X' stands for a Thompson Machine Gun? Should we say: 'That is your machine gun and, therefore, you can do whatever you like with it?' On the contrary, although there might be some things which you and only you can of right do to and with the gun, if that particular machine gun is your machine gun then it is incumbent upon you in particular to ensure that certain things are not done with it. Is the situation any different when 'X' pertains to one's body or to parts of it? I do not think so." | + | -Hugh V. McLachlan, ''Glasgow Caledonian University''.<ref>McLachlan, H.V. (1997). [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1377347/ Bodies, Rights, and Abortions]. Journal of Medical Ethics. Vol. 23. p. 176.</ref>}} |
| − | -Hugh V. McLachlan, ''Glasgow Caledonian University''.<ref>McLachlan, H.V. (1997). [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1377347/ Bodies, Rights, and Abortions]. Journal of Medical Ethics. Vol. 23. p. 176.}} | |
| | | | |
| | ==History== | | ==History== |
| Line 123: |
Line 122: |
| | | | |
| | [[Population control]] is based on [[pseudoscience]] and ill founded [[economics|economic]] assumptions.<ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/pz_myers_on_abortion040971.html</ref> | | [[Population control]] is based on [[pseudoscience]] and ill founded [[economics|economic]] assumptions.<ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/pz_myers_on_abortion040971.html</ref> |
| | + | |
| | === Adolf Hitler and Abortion === | | === Adolf Hitler and Abortion === |
| | ''For more information see:'' [[Abortion and Adolf Hitler]] | | ''For more information see:'' [[Abortion and Adolf Hitler]] |