Do you support Americans of one belief forcing female Americans of another belief, using the long arm of the government, to carry embryos in their abdomens until they become babies?
If so, is this not because you believe there is a metaphysical component in a fertilized ovum that makes it a good idea to treat it as though it were a person even though it isn't, in "ordinary," that is in non-religious, terms, a person?
The fact that you don't use the words "religious dogma" doesn't make your position not a religiously dogmatic one. You can substitute "moral" for "mystical" or "religious" all you want-- but it is an obfuscation, a ruse, and, if you want to persuade others to adopt your mystical, religiously based, definitions, a necessity.
Was it not called "moral," and not "religious," or "Catholic religious dogma," when not so very long ago the Catholic Church was preventing non-Catholics from purchasing contraception?
Of course it was. And the analogy is precise. |
