Woman gives herself 7 abortions.

Let me repeat for the fifth time: That is completely fiction. A fetus in a knowing woman has 15-20% of being miscarried, that is a higher rate than university dropout rate.

So you would risk aborting a child that may be conscious at 39 days just because you know you're within the limit? No, they would not be similar to someone who is brain dead, because it's almost certain that they will develop consciousness given the chance to progress in the womb - only in very few cases will fetuses remain mentally handicapped.

Again this applies to your school leaver analogy - not every school leaver will have the intelligence, academic profile, to become a university graduate. A fetus will DEFINITELY become a human being, there are no two ways about it. It's more about certainty in potentiality

As an advocate of women's rights, I believe this woman should have had the right to do this as the last thing that should be forced on a woman in our society is having to take responsibility for her actions.

There's a big difference between abortion and miscarriage - abortion is the definite killing of a fetus, miscarriage is an act of nature. My point is that IF a fetus avoids being miscarried, it WILL become a sentient being if it is not aborted.

As an advocate of Human rights, unless a woman will be severely harmed by pregnancy , abortion should be illegal and EVERY means possible, from protection to pills MUST be used to avoid pregnancy. If you are willing to have intercourse, then prepare before hand for having a baby.

No, it will not. The fetuses who have not been aborted got only 80-85% chance to be born.

The fetuses who already have got aborted do not get calculated in the statistics. They can do neither.

So it will not, and you just insist to not look at the facts and assert your opinions because you have no other argument.

Perhaps because you do not understand anything.

You need to be consistent if you're using something as an argument.

92 students out of 100 will graduate from a university and become graduates after they have obtained an offer.

79 fetuses out of 100 will be carried full-term and become babies. And that is for knowing women.

So if such 'potentiality' is your argument, you will need to recognise the fact that it is more likely for an offer holder to graduate than a fetus to be born. So if fetuses are considered babies, offer holders should be considered graduates.

Yes, I'm sure they shouldn't have tried to kill Hitler. Fanatically and dangerously utopian in outlook.

Hitler's mother loved him

Was this a failed attempt at making an argument and were you just trolling?

An abortion is a direct attack against an individual, it is an injustice because you are depriving that definite thing of a future. Contraception never allows that life to come to a point where it can be harmed, because that life is never formed. Because of this, there is no subject of harm in the case of contraception. Contraception only effects the sperm and egg individually; if the sperm and egg are joined this is essentially a fetus, and is the point at which life is definitely created.

Please show me some valid source to support that argument, because that seems absurd.

I consider a foetus and a human being to be essentially the same thing, though to apply the potentiality argument if a massive proportion of offer holders will graduate it would seem an injustice to arbitrarily disallow them access to university in much the same way the majority of foetus will be carried successfully to term so ending their chances of such would also be unjust.

To consider an offer holder a graduate or not to a certain extent is a matter of semantics if we are looking at 'life' as a whole. An offer holder will obviously have a much higher chance of becoming a graduate one day than a person who holds no offer of a university place in much the same way a foetus has a much higher chance of being carried to term than a sperm has of mixing with an egg.

To carry the rather odd analogy further, an offer holder is still a student, merely a student wishing to progress to the 'next stage' of education, one could equally argue that a foetus is a person merely wishing to progress to the next stage of person-hood.

I think that's a lazy argument destroyed in four words myself. You will remember I argued that ending a life because such a life can not always be born to a mother who wants the child is not a good reason to abort. Your response oddly was to say this would mean Hitler would escape abortion...hence Hitler's mother loved him.

except it isn't a definite thing. It has a high chance of being a miscarriage. It could potentially be two or three people if it splits into identical twins/triplets. It could be half a person if it joins with another fetus to form a chimera.

That is a lot of "if"'s and "could"'s, and that is why I do not accept an early fetus as an individual in its own right. In the end the only difference between abortion and contraception is the probabilities involved, in neither case is an actual conscious individual being harmed. You being aborted would have made no more difference to you than if your parents had used contraception, so I don't see how it is less ethical.

Richard wins.

x