As far as abortion is concerned, I believe that a woman’s right to bear a child does not equate her duty to do so. The state should never have the power to demand that a woman who becomes pregnant must maintain the pregnancy in order to protect the fetus’s rights, for it’s impossible to assert that a woman and a fetus have equal rights in the first place. Furthermore, asserting that the two have equal rights is a fundamental contradiction due to the very nature of pregnancy: either the fetus’s rights or the woman’s rights must have superiority over the other. If a fetus’s rights are held as superior to a woman’s rights, and since a woman has the potential of becoming pregnant against her will, then it is logical to conclude that all women are in fact potential property of the government. The justification for such a conclusion lies within the original argument’s pretense of protecting the unborn, or even protecting the potentially existing unborn, as some have argued for. Even if the government were to assert that a fetus is a person, it should never be granted the power to legally enslave or invade the body of one person to preserve the life of another.