Would anyone explain what exactly human right and civil right are? Between all these rights and laws, who dominates who? It is so confused. For example, between abortion and anti-abortion, which is human right, which is not? Is this one of the civil right if someone places our men/women in uniform to a more vulnerable situation by exposing the military secrets? Is hunting a human right? But then, if one group wants to hunt a certain kind of animal but another group must disallow such hunting, which group tries to remove the human right of the other group?
As pertains to the abortion issue, many prochoicers believe that bodily sovereignty is a fundamental human right; that women (as well as men) should have complete control over their own reproductive functions.
Prolifers, on the other hand, believe that zygotes, embryos, and fetuses are human beings and deserve the right to "life"; they believe the right to "life" (even at the expense of occupying and cannibalizing the body of another human being against her will) is a fundamental human right. But they don't believe born people have this right, only fetuses.
For instance, they don't believe born people have the right to blood, bone marrow, or organs from unwilling donors, even if they need them to live.
My feeling is this: nobody has the right to occupy the body of an unwilling human host, nor to extract her bodily resources against her will.
Born people do not have that right.
Therefore, fetuses- even if one concedes that they are human beings- also do not have that right.
To live at someone else's expense, or to someone else's physiological detriment, by commandeering parts of their body, is not a human right.
Not in my opinion.
To which prolifers will reply, "
Well then she shouldn't be spreading her legs then!"
At which point we've left the realm of "rights", both civil and human, and hopped an express train to Sillytown.
Anyway, that's my view on human rights as pertains to abortion; obviously, opinions vary.
It's a controversial and incendiary issue.