Why Mothers Don’t Have The Right To Refuse Babies The Use Of Their Wombs

It is implausible to claim a child does not belong in the place she began to exist and the only place she can survive: in the nurture and care her mother’s body naturally provides.

For most pro-choice advocates, the right to abortion hinges on affirming that a pregnant woman has the right to refuse her child residence in her body. But then the question may be asked, if a prenatal human being does not belong in her mother’s womb, where does she belong? The answer? Nowhere.

Even most pro-choice advocates don’t want to deal with the logical implications of this further claim. But conceding the child “belongs” in her mother’s body would require admitting the child has a “rightful place” there. This would upend the pro-choice position altogether.

For the sake of clarity, let’s put this in a formal, logically tight argument. I call it the argument from belonging. It goes like this:

1. If prenatal human beings do not belong in their mother’s womb, they do not belong anywhere.
2. But prenatal human beings do belong somewhere.
3. Therefore, prenatal human beings belong in their mother’s womb.

The rules of logic are much like math in that there are incontrovertible rules and formulas. This particular argument is an example of Modus Tollens, a particular formula of argument that is universally recognized as valid in the canons of logic.

This means if premises one and two are true, the conclusion follows logically. The only way to avoid the conclusion would be to deny the truth of one of the premises. However, there are a number of reasons to think both premises are true.

If Not Inside Their Mothers, Where Do the Unborn Belong? 

Read the rest from Timothy M. Jackson HERE at The Federalist.

If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.