What if We Took "Fetal Personhood" Literally?
When seeking out ways to take away women's reproductive rights, anti-choicers employ a variety of tactics, looking for the one that will stick. Of late, we've seen a spate of attempts to get "fetal personhood" bills passed, which would state "the term 'person' shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being." The goal is to get a clump of cells, otherwise known as a fertilized egg, deemed as much of a "person" as any full-formed, thinking, breathing individual, and in that way take away reproductive rights.
Of course, the debate on abortion wouldn't be completely closed by a personhood bill: just because it's a legally-defined "person" in a woman's womb doesn't automatically mean that she loses all rights to her own body, that she has to be an incubator and face the ordeal and risks of pregnancy. Any person who needs a womb, or a liver transplant, or bone marrow to live does not by their need have a right to use another person's body. But, as anti-choicers well know, it would certainly make it harder to legally defend a woman's human rights to set the beginning of full "personhood" at such an early moment. (A less-discussed effect is that it would also bar in-vitro fertilziation.)
Choice USA, however, has decided to create a humorous video pointing out what "fetal personhood" would mean if taken literally. Ticket for two for that concert?
Photo/Video credit: Choice USA







COMMENTS (6)