A landlord can have a tenant forcibly evicted even in the middle of winter, even if that tenant has nowhere else to go and no means to get there. The minimum notice for eviction in Arizona is 24 hours. Is a woman to have less authority over her own body than a landlord has over his property?
A landlord who evicts a tenant into a sub-zero winter storm is heartless, perhaps even evil, but the law still gives them that power over their property.
What should the state do if a parent evicted their child from their home and the child freezed to death?
Are you claiming that the little person in the womb is mere property?
Is a woman’s unborn baby property or a human being with inalienable rights?
If the woman wanted to excise a cyst, you’d be absolutely right. But since what we’re talking about is the intentional killing of an innocent human being (who is incontrovertedly not a body part, but a distinct human being, with different DNA than the mother), your analogy is inapposite. A better analogy would be a landlord who locked a tenant in the building and set it on fire with the intent of killing the tenant.
That makes no sense...can you elaborate a little? How are you justifying killing a baby?
A landlord who evicts a tenant into a sub-zero winter storm is heartless, perhaps even evil, but the law still gives them that power over their property.
I suggest you reread your Constitution and US case law e.g. inalienable right to life.
The right to life trumps the right to control property; both supposedly to be protected by the government. As such, your comparison of the two equates to discounting the value of life and implying the government should value property rights over the right to life.
What a stupid analogy you offer.
An eviction is for CAUSE. You have to do something to be evicted. You can't be evicted for being "inconvenient".
A woman had the authority over her body at the time she decided to participate in the activity that resulted in a pregnancy. But you seem to hold that an innocent third party must die for the misbehavior (or mistake, if you prefer) of another or two others.
I'll pray for your enlightenment, and the safety of any child you start.
A baby is no more a part of a woman's body than you are a piece of furniture in your house just because you are inside it.
A baby is a being that has a certain state of dependency. The dependency lessens throughout childhood, but we don't abort 12-year-olds, do we? Then why should we kill 12-week olds? There is no material difference.
Can't believe abortion is being advocated on FR.
As someone born at 28 weeks, I can say that the baby is not her own body but a separate individual being who moves and acts on its own. At 28 weeks in many states a lot of babies could be aborted. However I was protected because I was out of the womb.
You are trying to equate killing a baby over a lawful and rightful eviction??
“A landlord can have a tenant forcibly evicted even in the middle of winter, even if that tenant has nowhere else to go and no means to get there.”
Try getting a tenant evicted with 24 hours notice. Just go ahead and try...
“Landlords may evict tenants for a variety of reasons, however, all eviction notices must be in writing. The amount of time a tenant has to either vacate the premises or fix the problem, if possible, is dependent upon the type of eviction. For example, if you have an unauthorized pet, the landlord could give you 10 days to either vacate the premises or get rid of the pet. If the problem involves such things as criminal activity or threatening other residents or apartment staff, the required notice to vacate is 24 hours and there is no opportunity to fix the problem.”
To follow your analogy - if the baby in the womb is threatening the lives of other people...
“Giving notice is the first step in the eviction process. The notice required in Arizona for all situations except non-payment is a 10 Day Notice. Notice must be in writing and delivered in person or by certified mail to the tenant.”
So I guess if the baby has agreed to pay the mother rent, and then withholds the payment...
Bottom line: The baby, unlike a tenant, has a 100% chance of death in abortion. And the mother, by conceiving the baby, has an obligation to fulfill ‘the contract’ - which means delivery.
If the baby refuses to leave at 9 months, feel free to evict. It is called a C-section.
Landlords aren’t allowed to murder their tenants.
That’s the parallel.
If the woman’s body is her “property” then the baby’s body is also its “property”.
One: A fetus is a living, genetically distinct human being. It is not part of "her own body."
Two: A tenant subject to eviction is not unlike a trespasser. A fetus is not trespassing on the woman's body; he is exactly where he is supposed to be at that stage of his development.
Three: Your analogy only holds water if the landlord has the legal right to kill his tenant, and then throw his dismembered remains into the trash.