Yesterday I was involved in a rarity in my life: a civil argument with a 'pro-lifer'. This is an earnest young Republican man who was interested enough in a blog of mine on another site to comment and engage me in a discussion about women's rights. He was very polite and was good enough to keep religion out of the discussion, something I appreciated greatly.
Naturally, the topic of the discussion led to the 'rights' of the unborn.
More after the fold.
"While I understand that the health and life of the woman is important, you are not taking in consiteration the rights of the unborn child." He said.
Ahh, glad you brought that up. The latest tactic the pro-forced-gestation gang are using to erode, if not eliminate Roe vs. Wade, is to declare when 'life' begins; ie, at the moment of conception.
So here's what happened to me in 2000. I became pregnant and it was a pretty normal pregnancy until the 7th month. Then things went south in a terrible way. I developed a severe case of pre-eclampsia, lost the baby and nearly died myself.
When I filed taxes for 1999-2000 I could not claim that 'baby' as a dependant because then(and now)according to the Federal Government, for taxation purposes, that 'baby' never existed because she died in utero.
If the pro-lifers want to define a fertilized egg as a 'human being' with the same rights as the woman carrying it, then it's only fair that that fertilized egg be defined as a 'dependant' for taxation purposes as well.
That pretty much ended the 'rights of the unborn' argument.
I say we propose this to the 'rights of the unborn' nutcases in places like Colorado and watch their heads explode.