Tuesday, October 2, 2012

New Video Challenges “Bodily Autonomy” Argument for Abortion

Washington, D.C.—In a video released today by Secular Pro-Life, the mother of conjoined twins challenges the idea that “you don’t have the right to life unless you can live independently of someone else’s body.”

Tatiana and Krista Hogan, age five, are conjoined at the head.  Because they share brain tissue, and because Krista is partially dependent upon Tatiana’s heart for adequate blood supply, they cannot be surgically separated.  Overall, however, the girls have enjoyed good health, reaching their developmental milestones on schedule.
Mother Felicia Simms learned of her daughters’ condition at five months’ gestation, and refused to consider an abortion.  She has received anonymous hate mail for choosing life.

“They called the girls freaks,” she told the Daily Mail in 2010.  “The nameless letters said that I should never have had them.”

Secular Pro-Life president Kelsey Hazzard expressed her hopes that the video would benefit the family.

“Fortunately, the girls are too young to have understood those hateful messages,” she said.  “But that won’t last forever, and they are inevitably growing up in the public eye.  This video is a way for the family to say, ‘These sweet girls have a right to be here, and they’ve always had a right to be here.’  Hopefully people will start to think before they speak.”

The twins live with their family in Canada.  Filming was accomplished with valuable assistance from Canadian media group Signal Hill.  Movie to Movement and the Life Matters Journal also contributed to the project.

The purpose of the video is twofold.  Pro-choice and undecided viewers are moved to reconsider the bodily autonomy argument.  Viewers who are already pro-life are encouraged to put their convictions into practice by visiting the website, which promotes worthy charities untainted by connections to the abortion industry.

“Despite all the propaganda to the contrary, pro-lifers care deeply about the welfare of all vulnerable people, not only those not yet born,” Hazzard said.  “But pro-lifers are understandably cautious about where their money goes, and in recent months the Komen scandal has intensified that concern. connects pro-lifers to a range of charities that they can feel good about supporting.”  The site also includes non-financial ways for pro-lifers to make a difference.


Sean Timothy Maguire said...

That is so excellent! I really like this video. The question is poignant. It is horrifying that there are people who would say that Tatiana and Krista should have been killed. Horrifying.
They seem like very beautiful little girls! God bless them and their family! May they have many good people surround them and bless them with words and gestures of kindness for their entire lives. And may they be shielded from the mindless hatred of others.

156 said...

This is a great video. I think most people who support legalized abortion have different reasons for doing so, but this does effectively address one set of arguments.

Marauder said...

Abby and Brittany Hensel are another set of conjoined twins and are now in their early twenties. I stopped watching their reality show on TLC because they were so normal that the show was actually a little boring! It's disgusting the way some people are so wrapped up in using other people's differences to argue that those people shouldn't have been born. Best of luck to Tatiana and Krista always.

Bryan said...

"[Pro-choicers] say you don't have the right to life unless you can live independently of someone else's body."

Except that's not the argument. The argument is that the mother's right to bodily autonomy takes precedence over the fetus' right to life, not that the right to life is obviated by being dependent on another being. Hence why a mother should be able to get an abortion, but a random person can't just walk up and try to kill the fetus while it's inside the mother.

Other than the above strawman, this video's argument seems to be "Look, these conjoined twins are happy" --> "Bodily autonomy is an invalid defense of abortion." I'm not seeing the connection.

156 said...

Keep in mind that this "Bryan" clown is the same person who said he could not defend his bodily autonomy beliefs because he was too busy playing video games. Then he somehow found the time to spam the board with children's cartoons.

I have often heard supporters of legalized abortion argue that the unborn baby's physical dependence on his or her mother renders him unworthy of legal protection.

LN said...

Honestly haven't seen a single person spam SPL except you.

Bryan said...

The reply button still seems to challenge you as much as finding finding anything relevant to say. Also, I'd say posting 2 amusing pictures is nowhere near spam compared to your, what, 15 posts in a row with no reply button?

As far as the pro-choice argument, no one really argues that physical dependence removes human rights. You may construe the argument that way because it's easier to argue against, but that's not what we're actually saying.