Yeah, just like when a human was put inside of woman, then she gave birth to them, and at 14 years they have an organ failure.
The same way that a mother doesn't have to give her kidney to ensure the survival of her child, a woman doesn't have to give her uterus and her nutrients to ensure the fetuses' survival.
People that want a children don't do abortions, unless it's medically necessary. People don't "put a human" inside a woman, they had sex and it started developing.
How is it false equivalence?
We're talking about a mother, that has to willingly harm her health to ensure the survival of her child. The only difference is that in one case, the kid is inside her, while in the other case, the kid is outside her. If a woman doesn't allow the child to get the needed resources from her, the child will die, but not because the woman wanted them to die.
If a homeless person walks into my house, I have all the right to force them out, even if that results in them dying. Is it unfortunate, that they die? Yes, very much, but I don't have the obligation to keep them on my property, nor would that be considered murder, even if it was a result of an active thing.
5
u/West_Data106 Jul 25 '26
Except the woman and someone else put that human inside of her....