WRONG! We do not have and have NEVER had the "right" to be born. If your birth threatens the safety and/or security of the family,your family has the same right to self-defense as any other LIVING human being. Right up to the point a baby can be born and become a human,they are only potential humans and actual parasites.
I disagree. A republic, if you can keep it, life if you can hang on to it. There are no guarantees beyond birth, and in those few cases where the mother and infant would die, we have sanctioned terminating pregnancies (tubal and ectopic pregnancies, among others). But the one place designed to keep that developing baby safe should not be the slaughterhouse corral. There are enough who wish to raise it if the parents cannot.
As far as "potential humans and parasites", it can be argued there are millions living in their (grand)parents' basements and garage lofts who have yet to develop fully, living at the expense of the hosts. It is all too often a neotenic generation, nor is it limited to the most recent.
People have been aborting or killing infants in hard times of no food/no safety and having to run ever since the time of the cave man. They have had to do it in order to insure the survival of the living members of the family that are old enough to contribute to the family food supply and defense. Often times the infant would be smothered to keep it from crying and alerting enemies or wild animals of where the family was hiding. The usual cause was it was better for the infant to die quickly with a minimum of suffering instead of starving to death while dragging down the strength of the mother.
Yep, they have. But those were extreme cases and times, not the Untied States in the 20th or 21st century.
Historically, there have been a number of things people have been forgiven or which have been downplayed that occurred in survival situations, up to and including eating humans. We don't condone Jeff Daumer's 'Oriental Menu', either.
Even in the bible (No thump, just a few cites) Luke 21:23:
But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
Lamentations 4:10
The hands of the pitiful women have boiled their own children; They were their food in the destruction of the daughter of my people.
Just for a couple of references.
Granted,we live in more civilized times these days,and things have now turned upside down to the point where having a baby guarantees you "Free" food,housing,utilities,clothing,medical care,and even a check to live off of each month,and a awful lot of babies are born today that would never have been born in their mother and "likely candidate number ?" had to pay all the bills.
That does nothing to change the basic biological facts,though.
No matter how you spin it,a fetus is nothing but a POTENTIAL human.
Well, I have the opposite spin. We'll disagree. In terms of DNA: Species Homo sapiens. That makes it human. All that is at issue is the phase of development, and we see much older examples of the species that, for whatever reason, would not function autonomously well enough to survive long in extreme times. That doesn't mean we should sanction the removal of the infirm, the disabled, those who have cognitive difficulties from the population , any more than I think we should sanction the removal of humans who are not fully developed yet. Given time and the standard amount of nurturing they will develop into adult humans.
Any other species, given a sufficiency of provender, will protect its young, why shouldn't we?
The answer is not a biological one, although people have tried to sell it as one. The question is one of how to open a culture to the idea of eliminating those who refuse to be subject to power.
Start small, (literally), and work your way up. If the elimination of "unhealthy" babies in the womb is sanctioned, then the elimination of any inconvenient baby follows. After that we move on to the suffering, the dying, those who have cognitive deficits (beyond just being a Democrat), and the aged. The latter group is the real target. The latter group, once the elimination of the former groups is sanctioned, is vulnerable, from a strictly economic standpoint. Most people consume more in medical care in the last 6-12 months of their life than they do in the rest of it.
Those will be the arguments, "Remember Grandma/pa as they were." Don't let them suffer." (Which is what Obamacare will do, just to push for euthanasia.
But at the core of that, those old folks remember much freer times, they remember some semblance of Liberty, those mouthy old SOBs will pipe up, fearlessly, and tell some pup that that isn't the way this is supposed to work and educate everyone in the room. That's a serious pain in the ass of any wannabe totalitarian, and the easiest way to stop it is a nice, quiet, medical pogrom (for their own good, of course).
It isn't over resources, so that justification is out the window. It is over control, and the babies are just the first to be slaughtered on the totalitarian altar, sacrificed to the totalitarian god of power.
YMMV.
