emy
Convicted murderers in a court of law facing a possible death penalty have MANY more rights than,unborn babies in their mothers' wombs.Because even after you 'load the language' convicted murders are human beings with personalities, and 'unborn babies' (are eggs 'unborn chickens'?) of an age where abortion would be given for social reasons in a well-regulated healthcare system are not human beings with personalities.
If someone doesn't have a personality, then they are not someone.
Lots of people have no personalities (you didn't define that), should they receive post-natal abortions?
Moral equivalency is neither moral or equivalent, i.e., convicted murderers being compared to unborn children.Actually, you can't compare them, for the reasons given above. And yes I am being semantically awkward. It's a gift
Glad you pointed out that "It's a gift" I wouldn't have recognized it otherwise. BTW, "moral equivalency" is a term used to indicate that there is no right or wrong. They have become interchangable. Convicted killers are deserving of death, unborn babies deserve a chance to live. Right and wrong is clear and it is not interchangable. Gifted semantics is not needed.