Society could give embryos rights
Funny you should pick that. As I wrote it, I thought to qualify it (as you have just done), but that would have led me into another level of the discussion.
Yes, society could give embryos rights, but I don't believe these would truly be rights. I believe that society would be misunderstanding the meaning of rights. I don't believe that society can grant rights; They can only recognize them. Society can make laws and rules, and can assume power over choices of various kinds. In doing so they can violate rights by falsely identifying them. In short, I don't believe that might is right, even though it is very compelling.
I believe that right exists at a higher level than might. I believe that logic, and cause and effect, and other fundamental laws of the universe have ultimate authority over society. Just because society proclaims this or that does not make it a fact; It just makes it a policy. Society can claim that innocent teens are witches, and society can burn them, and society can claim it was their right--but it was only their might--coupled with a colossal ignorance. Society can claim the sun revolves around the earth, and they can act as if that was fact--but it is not.
Whether or not there is ultimate Truth is not what I am addressing here: Only that certain people within society have always had more accurate ideas than those ideas that are expressed by the collective. Therefore, I have enough conceit to proclaim that regardless of what society states about the rights of a fetus, it won't have any. And even if society murders me...I will.
So, if we define right as whatever the group with the most guns says it is, then--yes--I accept your point. If we are saying that rights has a logical meaning beyond inclination, whim, or caprice (as I do), then the point I intended is drawn. |
