Anti-Abortion Laws

To have a view of rights, one must first have an ethics- a code of survival based on the facts of reality. This presumes of course the choice to live, as it's alternative, the choice to die, is naturally something that will, if honestly taken with conviction, result in the person in question becoming unable to formulate an ethics, and lacking a need for one. There is no system for dying, there are a million random alternative deaths with no standard for preference. It is not death by immolation or indifference, but life which demands standards, preset attributes for one's actions, life which demands purpose, the goal one's action is to achieve, life which demands self-esteem, the knowledge that one is worthy of it, life which demands reason, the means of acquiring knowledge. One's own life is not any sort of means but an end to ethics. Politics, the field in which rights are discussed, begins when one realizes the impact other rational creatures tend to have on one's life. Any discussion of "rights," the proper relations between rational creatures, must begin with the goal of one's own life. We start simply, with A is A- with life as the goal of rights, the first right and the source of all others is the right to life, that is, one defends one's life from others, and since they are rational, that means they will defend theirs from you if you attempt to encroach. They will do so by eliminating the threat, i.e. you. Thus you do not deny them their right to life, so as to facilitate their denying you yours. This changes when they deny yours first, as they prove themselves irrational by doing so, and remove any future causality between your attacks on them and theirs on you. Indeed they reverse it, because you now have to kill them or otherwise interfere with their life in order to preserve your right to your own. The rights of liberty and property are derived from this, because with the requirement of the conforming of one's actions to the use of a reasoning mind to live, one's actions cannot be conformed to the dictates of force instead in order to live; and with the requirement to produce things necessary to one's existence, one's production must be reliably available in order to live. In summary rights require two things: Rationality, i.e. they are a code of action that applies to other rational beings, and Reciprocity, for treating beings in a manner consistent with rights that they do not treat you with is not only not helpful to your life, it's harmful to it. Where does a fetus play into this? A fetus is a group of cells that happen to have the characteristic of homo sapien DNA. It may or may not eventually turn into something rational, but at the moment it most certainly is not. It does not demonstrably think, and if it does think it's thoughts are certainly not evident in its actions. It does not produce the necessities of it's existence, nor anything to trade for them. It just sits there in a womb, suckling away. It thus violates the requirement of Reason. A fetus also does not observe the rights of the woman who does not wish it there. It does not ask permission, it does not leave when requested, it simply continues to trespass in a rational being's body, stealing that being's nutrients (violating the right to property), interfering with that being's actions (violating the right to liberty), and oftentimes endangering the host (thus often violating more directly the right to life as such). It thus violates the requirement of Reciprocity. This is why it does not have a right, to life or anything else.