He's obviously referring to fetal viability, not how well anyone can function on his/her own outside the womb. There are plenty of people/adults with special needs who can't function properly without care. No one is advocating killing them.
But to draw a pattern from n64's post, why is the heartbeat rational and not arbitrary? Why not go all the way to the 1-2 days after conception, when a positive pregnancy test wouldn't even register yet? It's because pro-lifers want that "evidence" of innocence to attach to calling it a summary execution; it makes preserving the womb as a vessel that much more important.
Deez has obviously laid out the moral framework for why we operate this way, and that's perfectly valid. But I'm struggling to find similar situations in a legal sense where it's defensible to force an extrajudicial sentence upon a person because of a personal choice (which... let's be honest... is also not typically because women demand that men ejaculate inside of them). We can shame all we want, but legislating it this way is an overreach.
-
Agree x 1
Last edited by a moderator: Sep 9, 2021