Why abortion is wrong.

please recheck your biology notes. a human fetus is a human being. there is no way for the child to being anything other than a human being.
Figure of speech. My point still stands.
ivf??? you mean In vitro fertilisation, do you not?
this is done with either an egg and sperm, or a fertilized egg also known as an embryo. not a fetus. or so I have not heard of nor seen a fetus being used in such procedure.
And the difference between a fetus and an embryo is? Either way, it is entirely possible to have a cluster of cells in a petri dish that is still capable of growing into a fully-sized human.

Did I say murder or kill?
Kill. right.
If I'm not mistaken, a suspect found guilty in such cases can be charged with manslaughter in the U.K. this is only probable if the child is considered a human which in turn means that human is a person.

agree/disagree?
have I read the law wrong?

The insinuation there was murder, or at least that's what anti-abortionists are always hasty to scream. In the UK there is no homicide offence that deals with the killing of an unborn child before it leaves the womb (though I'd be interested to see how things developed if such a case arose). If you're interested, see the cases of Vo v France (European Court of Human Rights) and Attorney-General's Reference No.3 of 1994

I do not remember the exact name, but if you ask a hospital on information, I am sure they may help you.


you should reread my statement.

I did not state nor does my statement suggest that every single woman who ever had an abortion was forced to do so.

I was talking about a single moment in which a woman is raped, and discovers she is pregnant.
what will you say to her?
I said that it is better to discuss the better option of allowing pregnancy, instead of terminating that pregnancy. the only way for you to say or tell her to terminate the pregnancy is to talk her into it.

if you are confronted with a decision, and someone suggests option a rather option b, then that person is talking to you, and talking you into doing the action. they may give what ever info they have or simply say, "what about A".

this is my understanding of these words. perhaps our perspectives are different in which you think that in order to be "talked into", the one doing the talking must be deceitful in some manner...or that the one being talked to will making an ill decision w/o proper consideration.

I admit I did not take the normal amount of effort to over look my words to be within an absolute context of how another may see it versus how I meant it to be read.

perhaps you may consider the question?

would you tell the woman to get an abortion, or consider pregnancy?
or would you op out all together?

Look at it like this. The baby can survive outside the woman. The fetus can't. A fetus is not viable until about 22 weeks. By your logic of it 'becoming' a baby, every time you pull out/have a ****/jizz yourself you're preventing the sperm from possibly becoming a baby.

Abortions are not something pleasant but they should be available

Other than the morning after pill, which does sod all if you've ovulated, what is there? There's the coil but that's not 100%

Actually no, in my argument I said definite potential, if the baby continues to develop under natural circumstances it will definitely come to being (deduct a neg-liable cases of miss-carriage) however, if you do not use contraception there is about 1 in 100 chance of actually conceiving a dedicated couple would try for a few months before conception. Now this is far from definite potential and is fairly low potential. Without the egg well its zero potential so your argument falls flat on its face.

From what I understand, it prevents the sperm cells from entering the egg. but the name given was some medicine name and I don't remember what that was.

You're counting it from conception then yes? Are you aware most eggs and sperms that meet don't actually implant? Everytime this happens is someone having an abortion or miscarriage?

Which proves my point, I said until conception actually happens it is not definite potential and as you said it is very low potential so they can't be classed under the same category.

What? After conception most fail, that's what I'm saying...

Not to mention the fact that most pregnancies do not go to full term, many are essentially just late periods. But of course that's "natural" so it's completely different

(sarcasm intended at the OP not you!)

I see what you mean my apologies.

"Are you aware most eggs and sperms that meet don't actually implant?"

Definition of conception: "The term conception commonly refers to fertilisation, the successful fusion of gametes to form a new organism"

I would say that definition is actually says when they implant and fuse. Beside I am talking about the time when people abort undeveloped babies which is from conception onwards. If the sperm was unsuccessful and implanting then definite potential doesn't take hold.

Nice name by the way.

From conception it might not implant and lots of ones that do then go on to fail.

Thanks

Did you even read what I wrote? It said conception is when they when the fuse and to fuse they need to implant...

Oh this is why I'm confused.

No, they fuse before they implant. I mean this respectfully, but I'd suggest reading up on what happens. The egg and sperm meet and the sperm fertilises the egg a while before, usually in the fallopian tube. That's why sometimes pregnancies can be ectopic. The fertilised egg is supposed to move down the tube and into the uterus, and implant. Often most don't, or implant and then don't carry to term.

Thank you for clarifying this. One thing I would like to ask is when do most abortions take places?

similar to saving 1 person or 5 people in a dire situation. whom would you chose? lets change the situation. 5 handicap males or 1 little girl. who would you save? do the lives of the males decrease in comparison to the girl? NO. they are all equal. they are all sacred.

every single person is equal in their own right, just different.

That's like saying if someone forced me to save one of two identical people who would I pick? Well, I would pick the one that was closest to me or the decision would be a chance outcome.

You see, your argument doesn't really work if you see them as the same, the baby in the petridish will become that baby in a few months time anyway so what does it matter which you save, one of them die anyway.

You see my point of view is born out of an ability to appreciate the future and the long term, something impulsive and literalistic society is devoid of.