Both are inherently expansionary, for example. Consider the parallels.
If offing her unborn child is a woman’s “right,” why should that “right” end at the conclusion of the first trimester? Or second? Or up till birth? Indeed, it is (as the saying goes) no accident that we are hearing occasional rumbles about “after-birth abortion.”
Likewise with assisted suicide. If the issue is about autonomy, about one’s supposed right to die “on my own terms,” why should there be any ethical calibration made about “good” reasons and insufficient reasons? If I can’t exercise my “right”–whether because I am in a weakened physical state or no longer can articulate my desires, or something else–then surely it is discriminatory not to facilitate my death.
And, of course, where the twin sisters of death meet is when countries decide that newborns should be killed if they are disabled (physically or intellectually) or because that’s what they would “want” if they were able to speak.
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
