There are, amazingly enough, those who call themselves "conservatives" who would have the government force a woman who has had an egg fertilized a matter of hours or days or three months ago -- even one fertilized by an act of rape or incest, even of a 13 year old child -- to carry that fertilized egg inside her body until it develops, over months, into a human being. I believe Chrisopher Hodgkins is one. I believe that although, unlike CH, he allows for exceptions for incest, rape, and children, Neocon supports government-controlled planning over family planning.
Would you call these individuals "conservatives," Michael?
Would you call that extreme intrusiveness on the part of the state?
If there were an egg growing in your own abdomen, Michael, from an act of rape, or as the result of an accident during an act of sex with a person with whom you would not want to be involved in raising a child for twenty years, would you think it intrusive of the government to forbid you to obtain from your doctor a prescription for a pill to abort the embryo or fetus from your abdomen, forcing you to retain it in your abdomen as it grew into a baby, grew larger and larger, until it was, some months later, an infant, and emerged, in a painful process taking many hours and containing some small risk of death, from a nether orifice of yours?
Wouldn't any true "conservative" have to consider such an extreme and intimate intrusion, an actual physical one, by government, an atrocious "intrusion into everyday life," in your opinion?
Just wondering about the truth of the claim that conservatives don't believe in "intrusions into everyday life." Or if they just want to choose their own special ones. |
