120 likes | 254 Vues
This discourse emphasizes that the right to privacy should not supersede the fundamental right to life. It argues that our nation's foundation and legal systems prioritize the sanctity of life, citing that unborn children possess intrinsic human value regardless of developmental stage. The text contends that, in cases where state interest compels the protection of life, the rights of the defenseless—especially the unborn—must take precedence over privacy rights, justifying a moral obligation to defend all human lives.
E N D
Human Life: A Compelling State Interest
The right to privacy is not the primary right. • The right to privacy has been used to justify slavery, child pornography, child molestation, domestic violence, child labor, dog abuse.
Our nation was founded on the right to life. (Decl. of Independence) • Most of our legal precedents are based on this right.
Does stage of development or size determine our value? • This six week embryo can feel pain.
The more defenseless the victim, the more their need for protection.
For persons, already born, the right to life supersedes privacy.
If there is a compelling state interest to protect your life and mine, then it is so also for these unborn lives.