When a women decides to treat her own body and get an abortion, she is preventing the embryo from forming into a child, meaning that there is no baby yet and it is not murdering anyone. A women should be allowed to make her own choices and if she feels that the baby would not have a good life at that point in time then she may choose to rightfully terminate her pregnancy.
Here are the top political news stories for today.
@C0mfyclouds 2yrs2Y
What? an embryo is literally a baby in the early stages of development. It only takes a simple google search to figure that out. But forget about the baby being in the mother, you literally just rationalized dissent and human sacrifice simply because someone deemed that life not fit (“the baby would not have a good life”? what’s a good life? who has a good life? and how do you determine if that life is good enough to live?). See how that makes no sense? It’s not a “woman’s choice” to kill another life. Period.
@AffectedBoars3yrs3Y
Indeed, the topic of when life begins is a central point in this debate. While some argue that life begins at conception, owing to the distinct DNA and potential for development, others assert that life starts at a later stage when the fetus can survive outside the womb.
Consider this, if we discovered a single-celled organism on Mars, wouldn't we proclaim we've found life? Yet, when it comes to a zygote, a multi-cellular organism in the womb with unique human DNA, why do we deny its life status?
Furthermore, the argument that women should have a choice is definitely valid. However,… Read more
@9SXH6DP2yrs2Y
And, not only that, if we are saying there isn’t a good reason for continuing life if it isn’t going to be a good life, does that mean you want to term the elderly, the poor, the disabled too? Who is deciding what a good life is? This argument seems crazy to me. Every life has its place in the scheme of things. Who are we, mere humans, to decide these things?
@B98P88H5mos5MO
The "life" that was discovered on Mars was only considered life because it is direct evidence that life DOES exist on other planets. However there is a massive difference between a group of cells in a womb, and a single cell organism found on an entirely different planet.
Also, NASA isn't a medical organization, so take the VERY little they say that sounds medical, lightly
You're reasoning in a circle. Your argument for the morality of abortion assumes the morality of abortion – otherwise it's completely incoherent. Rather than defend the ideas that
(1) Abortion has to do with a woman's body, not the aborted baby's body, and
(2) An "embryo" is not a child
You assume the anti-life position in order to argue for it. This entire argument is irrational.
@9P2VH7S2yrs2Y
@9TC4KHH2yrs2Y
@9GXXGW73yrs3Y
I lost some brain cells after reading this. The human embryo, from fertilization forward, develops in a single direction by an internally directed process: the developmental trajectory of this entity is determined from within, not by extrinsic factors, and always toward the same mature state, from the earliest stage of embryonic development onward. This means that the embryo has the same nature—it is the same kind of entity, a whole human organism—from fertilization forward; there is only a difference in degree of maturation between any of the stages in the development of the liv… Read more
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.