Thursday, November 29, 2012
The right to be inside a uterus
The answer tells us why a woman is not obligated to give her child her kidney but is obligated to “give” her child her uterus.
… The kidneys exist for the health and proper functioning of the body in which they reside. In other words, kidneys exist in a body, for that body.
In contrast, the uterus exists in one body, to be around — and for — another body. The fact that a woman can live without her uterus but a fetus cannot shows that the uterus exists for the unborn child rather than for the mother.
The unborn, as members of the human family then, must not be denied the environment that regularly waits in great expectation for them….
[M]aintaining pregnancy is simply doing for the unborn what parents must do for the born — providing the shelter and nourishment a child needs. It is what is required in the normal course of the reproduction of our species.
Furthermore, when unborn children are aborted, they are directly and intentionally killed in the environment made for them. A kidney patient, in contrast, dies as a result of kidney disease. As a physician friend of mine pointed out, “In the renal [kidney] analogy, if nothing is done, one person dies. In the pregnancy case, if nothing is done, no one dies.”…
A woman’s uterus may be in her body, but every month it gets ready for someone else’s body. It exists not so much for us as women, but for our offspring.
- Stephanie Gray, Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform
h/t Jill Stanek