Why abortion is wrong.

I didn't say it was infanticide, I made the comparison. Make the distinction.

I find it worrying that a prospective midwife doesn't know the difference between a foetus and an infant. I'll have to make a note of her face and avoid her if I ever have the misfortune of getting
her as my midwife in future.

I didn't say it was infanticide, I made the comparison. Make the distinction.

Abortion is terrible, its horrendous and traumatizing but I'd rather go through that than raise a child wrong and give it a bad life.

It's (not) my body, i will have a child when I.m ready for motherhood, when i can love and support a child and give him/her what she/he needs.

There are vast differences between the bunch of cells that consist an embryo and those that I am made up of. Read around embryology if you want to better see how vast that difference is.

You quoted the thing that explicitly stated "Just because we wish to prevent 93% of unnecessary killings it doesn't mean we can't make amends for where the lives of mothers are threatened."
Then... you went on to write that anyway...

then don't get pregnant. abortion only stops the pregnancy before it may be completed.

all any child needs is a mother to act like a mother. a father to act life a father. that's all.

the child is not your body.

your concept still does not make sense. go through with absoluteness vs limited possibility.

To quote Judith Jarvis Thomson, who covers this point wonderfully: If the room is stuffy, and I therefore open a window to air it, and a burglar climbs in, it would be absurd to say, "Ah, now he can stay, she's given him a right to the use of her house--for she is partially responsible for his presence there, having voluntarily done what enabled him to get in, in full knowledge that there are such things as burglars, and that burglars burgle.''

Sex was made for the creation of new beings. Windows that open were not made to let burglars in. This metaphor is invalid.

It isn't infanticide because it isn't yet an infant. It's a foetus. Make the distinction.

Assumes a creator.

The metaphor is that sex allowing pregnancy is comparable to leaving a window open allowing a burglar in.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Ok, well the function of sex is to create new beings.

And that assumes sex cannot be used for pleasure!

And it still doesn't negate the metaphor.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Scientifically, we are animals. In nature animals have sex to reproduce to keep their species running, pleasure is a by-product.
However, humans see themselves in a different light.

Anyhow, people should be aware of the possible outcome of sex - even with contraception. Why should an innocent child (foetus is just a word used to deceive people into believing that an unborn child shouldn't have rights) be painfully killed for their parents' actions. It wouldn't be acceptable if you were killed because your parent did something wrong, so why is it acceptable in these cases?

How does my argument not negate the metaphor?

The 'creature' inside the womb is a foetus until it is borne...and yet they could live outside the womb a few months before birth - but they're still given the name foetus as it makes a distinction between humans and unborn humans as killing a baby would be murder - but removing life from a foetus is nothing because foetus' have no rights.

Disabled foetus' can be aborted up to the day of birth. If one foetus was born early it could not be destroyed as it is now considered a human...and other humans generally have morals about murdering humans. However, if the foetus was not born early it could still be killed and society would completely except it.

People get upset about unnecessary wars in other countries with many people dying and yet they condone the killing of millions innocent children. Hypocrisy in its greatest form!

I find abortion completely unacceptable and very upsetting.

a pipe down, im not pregnant nor have i ever been jeeeeze. it's not a child in my eyes, the embryo, the bunch of cells are part of my body. The fact that a child would wreck my life isnt a limited possibility, it's an absolute certainty.

.... okay a pipe is down. ware you fixing your plumbing?

no, the child is not a part of your body, it is simply connected to your inners.
your arm is a part of your body. your appendix is a part of your body. another human is not.

conjoined twins? is one a part of the other? no, just connected. same thing here. you are connected.

cheerio

Well you might find abortion unacceptable. But frankly, I think it's a woman's right to choose, and I think you need to keep your conservative and reactionary opinions to yourself.

They aren't children. They're unborn zygotes with no nerve endings and can't feel pain. It isn't hypocrisy, as it isn't murder.

children
1.A young human being below the age of full physical development or below the legal age of majority.
2.A son or daughter of any age.

are not children? ha! clearly they are young and a son or daughter. they are children.

it may not be hipocrisy to stamp out a single group of humans and seperate their 'worth' from the rest (some times), but it is prejudice.

the definition of murder may not fit to your liking, but homicide does regardless to anyone's liking.

So, where along the umbilical cord does it go from being the baby to being the mother?


Posted from TSR Mobile