The following is a 7 message exchange between 4 users
@9FZKSH6 8mos8MO
The Constitution protects the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, to us and our posterity.
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?
@9FZLZK68mos8MO
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 8mos8MO
"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
@HarmoniousMooseGreen8mos8MO
“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 8mos8MO
"...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
@HarmoniousMooseGreen8mos8MO
“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.
@9FZKSH6 8mos8MO
There's no way you just argued that sea turtle babies should be protected but not human babies--greater is one human life than all of the sea turtles to ever exist.
