You're not arguing that it's a bad analogy, you're arguing as though I said the things are equal.
Now who is arguing with things I haven't said..
I'm arguing that applying the
logic of self-defence to this situation is ridiculous on a number of levels. Firstly because the decision and thus responsibility does not lie with the person who is at risk of dying, but more fundamentally because we are not talking about two separate people. Again, if we were then one would be assaulting the other by virtue of being inside them without their consent.
Has anyone ever told you that you have an overactive imagination?
Yes, I do. It's part of having ADHD. However, it also doesn't make me wrong.
You have literally claimed that the purpose of elective abortions is to kill fetuses and that people who have elective abortions want those fetuses to die. That is a horrendous mischaracterization of the motivations or typical emotional reaction to having an abortion.
A fetus is part of someone else's body in a very literal, biological sense. This is why separating it usually kills it. It exists in an inherently liminal state between being an organ and being a separate organism, a condition that only resolves a few hours after birth as a baby's metabolism accelerates to allow it to maintain homeostasis (this is why newborn babies need to be kept warm). Again, we are dealing with the generation of human beings themselves, there are going to be states that are difficult to resolve into clear categories. That's why a degree of epistemic humility is necessary.
It may very well be within our lifetimes that society looks back on abortion the same way we think of historical infanticide. You're gonna have to get used to being seen as evil.
This will only be true if the "pro-life" position finds some way to substantiate itself beyond vacuous and easily critiqued dogma. It has not, hence why it has not gained any significant ground outside of the evangelical heartlands of the US and parts of Africa. Even majority-Buddhist countries, which have far clearer cultural and historical reasons to oppose abortion on religious grounds, have not fallen into this bizarre ideological hole.
Nonetheless, I agree in the sense that infanticide is a historical practice that has been largely superseded by better options (like abortion). One day it's very likely that there will be better options than abortion. But I can assure you, by the point that happens noone will remember or care about you or your ideology unless you can find a way to imbue it with some substance it currently lacks.
