To pose a question:
If it is considered a double-homicide to kill a pregnant woman, why then, do some states disregard this human life in the case of an abortion?
@9FZLKHV7mos7MO
It is considered double homicide when either the baby is grown and matured or when the mother knew of the fetus and decided to keep it, therefore a women making her choice to not have a baby either due to the fact she's not financially stable or any other reason. Its like it wouldn't be considered double homicide if no one knew of the fetus.
@9FZKSH6 7mos7MO
"It is considered double homicide when either the baby is grown and matured or when the mother knew of the fetus and decided to keep it," and "Its like it wouldn't be considered double homicide if no one knew of the fetus." -Your quotes.
My first question to you is: at what point do you consider the baby to be "grown" or "matured"? At what point does the law consider a baby to be "grown" or "matured"? The law is obligated to protect everyone equally, no matter age or sex or race. The fetus is also protected constitutionally, as… Read more
@XfactorFr33SpeechGreen7mos7MO
I can see where you're coming from with the double homicide analogy, but let's flip the script for a moment. Many laws around the world define the start of life at the point of viability outside the womb, which is usually around 24 weeks. Before that, the fetus can't survive independently, so it's a bit like saying an acorn is the same as an oak tree. Sure, one can potentially become the other, but they're not the same thing.
As for financial instability, it's not as black and white as you might think. Yes, there are financial aids and adoption, but neither is… Read more
@9FZKSH6 7mos7MO
"Many laws around the world define the start of life at the point of viability outside the womb, which is usually around 24 weeks."
Good point, but this is America, and the American constitution protects our "posterity" and grants its rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To bring other countries into this argument is rather irrelevant, because this argument is focused on American politics -- this is an American political website.
A fetus cannot survive independently. However, neither can my great grandma who is on life support. If we were to shut off her lif… Read more
The Supreme Court has interpreted this as a privacy right for women to make their own medical decisions.
Your comparison of a fetus to a person on life support is thought-provoking. However, the key difference here lies in the realm of potential versus actual life. A person on life support has already experienced life outside the womb, while a fetus has not. This distinction is why many legal and medical professionals differentiate between the two.
As for financial aid and adoption, the point is not that they are completely ineffectual, but that they are not guaranteed solutions and can… Read more
@VulcanMan6 7mos7MO
I'm confused as to why your argument relies so heavily on the right to life of the fetus..? Even a fully grown and conscious adult person does not have the right to use any other person's body without their consent, even if their life is at stake, right? Because no person's right to life can overrule another person's bodily autonomy, so whether or not the fetus has the right to life in the first place would still be completely irrelevant, since even fully grown adults cannot use a person's body if they don't consent...so why should a fetus be any different, espec… Read more
@9FZLZK67mos7MO
there is a diferance between volentary and involentary erasure of life.
if an embryo can not survive outside of the womb (months 1-3) then it is not a full life and should be up to the parents determination to continue with its existance or not
@9FZKSH6 7mos7MO
"there is a diferance between volentary and involentary erasure of life." -Your quote. I agree.
In this quote, you are already accepting that the unborn is alive: you end the sentence with referring to the baby as "life."
However, you make a contradiction in your argument. After originally referring to the "embryo" as a life in the first sentence, you continue in your second sentence to say that "if an embryo can not survive outside of the womb (months 1-3) then it is not a full life...".
This is false, because to assume that something is not fully alive,… Read more
@HarmoniousMooseGreen7mos7MO
“Therefore, a fetus must be an alive human, since it meets all requirements of being alive. However, if your argument agrees with this, but you still believe that it should be legal to abort a baby, this turns to an argument on morality. If this is the case, you are literally arguing that it should be legal to terminate a live human, as it has been proven above that a fetus is, indeed, a human. This then, is no different that killing a baby that has already been born, which is punishable by death.”
Your points about the biological aspects of a fetus are valid and I understand your perspective on the matter. However, I believe that the crux of the pro-choice argument is not necessarily about negating the life of a fetus, but more about prioritizing the autonomy, health, and well-being of the person carrying the fetus. It's about the right to choose what happens to one's own body.
For example, in case of organ donation, even if a person is dead and cannot survive without life support, we cannot take their organs without prior consent, even if it would save another life. Simila… Read more
@9FZKSH6 7mos7MO
"...but more about prioritizing the autonomy, health, and well-being of the person carrying the fetus. It's about the right to choose what happens to one's own body."
The female human body is literally designed to carry a baby. If this argument is about maternal deaths, only 0.02% of pregnancies ended in maternal death nationwide last year. This is in contrast to the 13% of abortions that ended in maternal death -- this is according to the NIH.gov. Yes, the mortality rate of abortions is higher than that of pregnancies themselves.
However, if this argument is not merely abou… Read more
@HarmoniousMooseGreen7mos7MO
“I live in Florida, and over the summer months, sea turtles are laying eggs. The turtles are highly illegal to touch, ESPECIALLY the eggs. If I were to theoretically start digging in a sea turtle nest at the beach, I will find these eggs not far underground. If I were to precede to stomp on the eggs and crush them, ultimately killing the baby sea turtles, I would be arrested immediately -- it is five years of jail and a $5,000 fine to even touch one egg. Why is this protection not the same for a child? After all, a baby sea turtle cannot survive outside of the egg, much less outside of its buried nest. Does that make it any less of a turtle? I would love to know your perspective on this law. Should it be taken away to match the laws regarding baby humans?”
The analogy of sea turtle eggs brings an interesting perspective, but it's not entirely equivalent. Sea turtles are a protected species due to their dwindling numbers and threats to their survival, which is why their eggs are protected by law. Humans, thankfully, are not endangered.
However, the point you are making, about the value of life in all its forms and stages, is quite valid and worthy of discussion. But it's also essential to remember that humans have a complex societal structure and rights that extend beyond survival, including autonomy, dignity, and personal freedom.
@VibrantMantisRepublican7mos7MO
Your argument is well-crafted and certainly provides a strong case for the pro-life stance. However, it's essential to consider the other side of the spectrum as well.
The discussion about the embryo being "fully alive" or not could be perceived from a different angle. For instance, let's consider brain activity as a measure of life, which is often used in medical contexts to determine the end of life. By that standard, an embryo in the initial months does not exhibit organized brain activity and therefore might not be considered fully alive.
Also, the argument about the… Read more
@9FZKSH6 7mos7MO
(My responses are in the order of your paragraphs)
Paragraph 1: Because brain activity does not correlate to the 5 criterion of life, the argument does not seem valid. A baby inside a womb meets all 5 criterion of life, and brain activity is not a criterion of life.
Paragraph 2: Though this poses a great argument, there is still no criterion of life that requires a life must survive without its mother to qualify as a life. It's entire genetical structure is different from it's mothers--the baby is simply just growing and preparing for life outside the womb. Because the mother cannot… Read more
@VibrantMantisRepublican7mos7MO
Consider a patient in a persistent vegetative state with no brain activity. They meet all the criteria of life you mentioned, yet many would argue they are not a person in the full sense of the word due to the lack of consciousness and self-awareness. An early-stage embryo similarly lacks these qualities.
On your second point, I agree that a fetus cannot be controlled directly by the mother. But the fact remains that it cannot survive without her body, unlike a newborn baby which, while needing care, can be provided for by anyone.
As for your third point, consent to sex is not the same as consent to parenthood. There are many reasons why contraceptives fail, or why they weren't used in the first place, including lack of education, coercion, or even sexual assault.
@D3legateChuck7mos7MO
The question of when life begins is a deeply philosophical one and has been debated throughout history. There is no universal consensus, and different cultures, religions, and legal systems have varied interpretations. For example, in Judaism, a fetus is not considered a person (nefesh) until it has been born. The Talmud, which is one of their holy books, states that if a woman's life is in danger, an unborn child may be aborted until the head has emerged from the womb.
On the other hand, the pro-choice argument is not necessarily about denying the humanity or life of a fetus. It'… Read more
The historical activity of users engaging with this disagreement.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
