This is a classic example of someone making certain political assumptions about abortion and then distinguishing between what intelligent people are obligated to think in regard to an unwanted pregnancy and what unintelligent people think instead. One of us/one of them.
Like those on the other side are not able to articulate their own rendition of this relationship in defending the right of the unborn baby to live. Or in defending their own set of assumptions in regard to when human life begins – from the point of conception on.
Recall that obtuse intellectual contraptions like this are precisely what I aim to avoid in regard to our reactions to any particular set of circumstances in which a woman is pregnant and does not want to be.
That’s not where I focus my argument though. My aim is to explore your “analysis” – anyone’s analysis – as an existential contraption rooted in dasein. In any particular context involving a conflict between the individual and the community, there are going to be values/loyalties in conflict. Take conscription for example: connectusfund.org/10-meaningful … ry-service
My argument suggests that any particular individual will derive his or her values more from the sequence of experiences in his or her life [out in a particular world historically, culturally and experientially] rather than as an ethicist able to actually pin down [philosophically or otherwise] one’s moral obligation here.