MBS says,
"it's ironic that it would take a case of discrimination against a particular type of foetus to cause us (some of us, at any rate) to question the "right to choose," but in the event of no such bias, there is no issue except from the standpoint of the unblemished foetus. In effect, by assuming away any defects or knowledge of any defects, the foetus is rendered less worthy of consideration, a reverse discrimination."
Correct! Right to choose means right to discriminate, right to select criteria for choosing. People may disagree on appropriate criteria, but that's what "right to choose" is about. I'm for it completely when it comes to children. Nobody should have a child they are not willing to spend *at least* 18 years enthusiastically raising.
As for "rights", they are the outcome of struggle and a sense of solidarity. Nowadays, many people feel powerless, as voiceless as fetuses (feti?), and hence show an otherwise irrelevant tendency to identify with them. I was about to write, "Rights for fetuses? Let them struggle for them!", but then shrank back--well, I guess I didn't, did I--because I could just hear a similar dismissal for myself, my friends, and most of my favorite causes. Well, too bad, though, that's the reality. Let's not obsess on "ethical dilemmae" like these.
Michael Brun