If someone's faith defines a fetus as a full fledged human being, why is that any less significant to the discussion then if it is supported by a legal definition.
A crime is defined by the laws of whatever jurisdiction we live in. It is of significance to all who are under that jurisdiction and affects all our conduct. What someone's faith tells him may be of enormous significance to him and the giver of his faith, whoever or whatever that may be, and perhaps to others of the same faith. It affects how that individual conducts himself. It is of no significance to others unless his execution of it encroaches on them.
If the religious right were to have a fetus legally defined as a full fledged human being, now that it would be considered "murder" by the full legal definition, would your views about abortion change?
I served on a jury once that convicted a woman of prostitution and sodomy. They had a terrible time impaneling a jury. One person after another repeated that he thought it shouldn't be illegal and that he couldn't ever vote to convict. I didn't think it should be illegal, either, but it was and I voted to convict, although I maneuvered all I could to lessen the sentence. It's not necessary to agree with the law to respect it and follow it.
As for accepting it as correct, I could probably adopt the idea that aborting a viable fetus for any reason other than the health of the mother was murder. I don't think I see the point of that, though. Those babies generally don't live very long anyway. Forcing them to come to term just prolongs the pain of the family and the baby, although it might be easier on the hospital staff. I don't think it would be cost effective to implement.
I don't think I could ever get my head around defining aborting an early-stage fetus as murder. If killing a fetus were ever designated as murder, the chaos that would ensue as our society and legal system came to terms with the implications would make better theatre than O.J., the Gulf War, and the impeachment combined. A sorry mess, it would be. But I would respect that the law was the law, until the side effects forced a repeal.
Karen |
