Within this reading, there are different ideas of what constitutes being alive. The bill its self says that a child can be "retroactively" aborted "on the condition that the child's life doesn't 'technically' end". This to me seems like a contradiction within itself. By definition, the word abort means to come to a premature end so if the life does not "technically end" how can it be qualified as aborted?
The biggest contrast seems to fall between kids who are able to get unwound and adults who are able to make that decision. When Risa is confronted about being unwound the adults identify it as change and she rebuts saying that death is more than change. In response, the social worker says, "'Change...that's all. The way ice becomes water, the way water becomes clouds. You will live, Risa. Only in a different form'" (24).
I think that many of us would agree that people are inherently different than water that simply slips into different forms under different circumstances. How could you best rebut this last quote?
No comments:
Post a Comment