why do pro lifers believe the rights of a fetus trump the rights of an actual living human being
During a pregnancy, a fetus is entirely dependent on the woman for sustenance. It's basically a parasite (not trying to be cruel, but I am simply stating what is true) . It has the use of her food, organs, etc. The whole bit. Now. Say that you were in desperate need of a kidney and I was a match for you. You could not legally compel me to give you my kidney. I could be the only person alive who matched you on earth, and it could mean that you would die, but I would be within my right to deny you my kidney. This would be true if you were my mother, father, sister, brother or child. So, if a living person can't legally hijack use of your organs, why would/should a fetus be able to? You're applying rights to a fetus that a living person wouldn't have, including a living offspring who needed a parent's organ.
While the death of a living thing is bad, forcing a woman to carry a baby she can't have or doesn't want or that could kill her isn't that great, either.
During a pregnancy, a fetus is entirely dependent on the woman for sustenance. It's basically a parasite (not trying to be cruel, but I am simply stating what is true) . It has the use of her food, organs, etc. The whole bit. Now. Say that you were in desperate need of a kidney and I was a match for you. You could not legally compel me to give you my kidney. I could be the only person alive who matched you on earth, and it could mean that you would die, but I would be within my right to deny you my kidney. This would be true if you were my mother, father, sister, brother or child. So, if a living person can't legally hijack use of your organs, why would/should a fetus be able to? You're applying rights to a fetus that a living person wouldn't have, including a living offspring who needed a parent's organ.
While the death of a living thing is bad, forcing a woman to carry a baby she can't have or doesn't want or that could kill her isn't that great, either.