Personal Decisions about Personhood

Another interesting quote from the abortion issue.

From the Rapid City Journal today:

Speaking against HB1293, Donna Haukaas of Lake Andes, who is a member of the Indigenous Women’s Political Caucus, told the committee that the bill would create hardships for women on reservations. “Rape in Native American communities is 3.5 times higher than among all other groups,” she said.

She added, “Government legislation has no place in personal decision making.”

So is she saying that government legislation, such as laws that make rape illegal, has no place in the personal decision of the rapist to rape the woman? After all, it IS a personal decision that the rapist made.

But it's different for the decision to rape? Why? Because the woman is a person, of course...implying the unborn child is NOT a person.

This is why the issue of personhood is at the center of the abortion issue.

The rapists right to his "personal decision" is superseded by the woman's right to protection. If the unborn child is indeed a unique human being, then the child's right to protection supersedes the woman's right to have an abortion.

If the unborn child is a person, deserving of constitutional protection (just as the raped woman is deserving of constitutional protection), then abortion should be illegal.

And the science supports the contention that the unborn child is, indeed, a person.