Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Irongrip400 on October 14, 2015, 01:41:51 PM
-
I keep seeing this shit brought up in so many different threads, and I actually thought about posting this after driving by a Planned Parenthood office (randomly) and saw 4-5 people outside picketing. It made me think, are any of our resident Getbiggers there now, either outside or in? I would like to first state my thoughts on abortion, as if you cared.
I personally think it is wrong, and having two small children could never think of doing it or agreeing with it when used as a solution to failed birth control methods. That said, I do think it should be the woman's choice, and that in the case of rape/incest/or threat to the mothers life, I would never have a problem with it. A woman who does it for reasons of convenience will have to deal with her decision on her own, with her own conscience, in this life (or the next). Women bare a huge responsibility with their ability to grow and give birth to children. There are things that go with that responsibility, like having the right to choose what you would want to do with your own body.
I think the reason that I think ill of it, is because I have been in an ultrasound room, and seen that these unborn babies, are after a few months, living beings. They can't deal with being outside on their own, but they have organs and living tissue. I find it hard to believe, that anyone who has had this experience, would be "okay" with the practice, but I think most level headed individuals would agree that it is the woman's right to choose.
The reason for my above response, is because I would like to know if any of the posters who are "okay" with abortion, have kids or not. I'm not trying ot get into a bunch of hate speech between members, or thoughts on God etc., but just what everybody's thoughts are on this subject. Any takers?
-
the Germans were big it a few decades ago
???
-
if done for convenience-which most of it is- then it is a barbaric, evil practice.
-
Im pro-abortion.
I hate wearing a condom, and i have no interest in paying bills for the rest of my life.
-
Im pro-abortion.
I hate wearing a condom, and i have no interest in paying bills for the rest of my life.
Do you have, or do you ever want children?
-
Birth control is available everywhere practically, and often its free to obtain, everybody knows how "getting pregnant" happens... in today's society abortion shouldn't be necessary, but here we are.....
All you pro abortion folks... what if YOU were aborted-? and don't say the usual " then I wouldn't know it or wouldn't be here..." BS
An abortion is the result of making a BAD CHOICE- PERIOD
Rape is maybe 1-2 % of abortions, obviously anybody raped should have the option, other than that- NO
-
Birth control is available everywhere practically, and often its free to obtain, everybody knows how "getting pregnant" happens... in today's society abortion shouldn't be necessary, but here we are.....
All you pro abortion folks... what if YOU were aborted-? and don't say the usual " then I wouldn't know it or wouldn't be here..." BS
An abortion is the result of making a BAD CHOICE- PERIOD
Rape is maybe 1-2 % of abortions, obviously anybody raped should have the option, other than that- NO
Not always. Sometimes birth control fails.
-
Birth control is available everywhere practically, and often its free to obtain, everybody knows how "getting pregnant" happens... in today's society abortion shouldn't be necessary, but here we are.....
And yet, this free and readily available birth control you speak of isn't bulletproof.
All you pro abortion folks... what if YOU were aborted-? and don't say the usual " then I wouldn't know it or wouldn't be here..." BS
"what if YOU were aborted?" isn't an argument.
An abortion is the result of making a BAD CHOICE- PERIOD
Really? What "BAD CHOICE" did Elizabeth Waltrip (http://q13fox.com/2014/08/31/boy-born-without-a-brain-lives-to-be-12-years-old-dies-peacefully/) made? Her son was born with hydranencephaly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydranencephaly) - he didn't have a brain - through no fault of hers. While she didn't have an abortion, should she not have had the option available to her because you think it all boils down to "BAD CHOICE"?
Rape is maybe 1-2 % of abortions, obviously anybody raped should have the option, other than that- NO
Really? Flat out "NO"? Even before 20 weeks? What about cases where the pregnancy is risking the life of the expectant mother?
-
Yes abortions should be allowed...If not for anything for population control...We already have over 7 billion on the earth and growing...Tons of resources being used...If we can limit the population in the most humane way possible then we must do that...Plus there is no point in bringing a child into the world that is going to live a poor, miserable life..
-
Do you have, or do you ever want children?
No and no.
-
How many abortions since '73 ? Maybe 40 million ?
:o
-
How many abortions since '73 ? Maybe 40 million ?
:o
I was a bit shocked by that number, so I did some research. It's a universally accepted figure and a shocking one at that, to be sure. But let's take a step back for a second and look at the numbers.
According to the United Nations, about 21,000 people die of hunger or hunger-related causes every day. Let's round that number down to 20,000. This works out to 7,300,000 deaths per year, almost all of which could have been prevented. And this 7,300,000 figure doesn't include the those who die because they lack access to clean water (another million deaths per year), or they contract of malaria transmitted by mosquitoes (another 500,000 deaths per year), or they contract measles, rubella, pertussis, or diphtheria (a few hundred thousand deaths per year).
So, a little over 8,000,000 of our fellow humans die of hunger and dirty water every year. About 15 of them will die during the time it will take you to read this post. Let that sink in for a moment.
That's not to say that we should just whitewash the approximately 1,000,000 abortions per year happening in the United States. But I do find it interesting - and a bit sad - that people who are so intensely devoted to fighting for the "unborn" don't wish to care for or help the born...
-
I keep seeing this shit brought up in so many different threads, and I actually thought about posting this after driving by a Planned Parenthood office (randomly) and saw 4-5 people outside picketing. It made me think, are any of our resident Getbiggers there now, either outside or in? I would like to first state my thoughts on abortion, as if you cared.
I personally think it is wrong, and having two small children could never think of doing it or agreeing with it when used as a solution to failed birth control methods. That said, I do think it should be the woman's choice, and that in the case of rape/incest/or threat to the mothers life, I would never have a problem with it. A woman who does it for reasons of convenience will have to deal with her decision on her own, with her own conscience, in this life (or the next). Women bare a huge responsibility with their ability to grow and give birth to children. There are things that go with that responsibility, like having the right to choose what you would want to do with your own body.
I think the reason that I think ill of it, is because I have been in an ultrasound room, and seen that these unborn babies, are after a few months, living beings. They can't deal with being outside on their own, but they have organs and living tissue. I find it hard to believe, that anyone who has had this experience, would be "okay" with the practice, but I think most level headed individuals would agree that it is the woman's right to choose.
The reason for my above response, is because I would like to know if any of the posters who are "okay" with abortion, have kids or not. I'm not trying ot get into a bunch of hate speech between members, or thoughts on God etc., but just what everybody's thoughts are on this subject. Any takers?
Plants are living and have organs with living and growing tissue.
I think all the people who want to force mother's to have unborn should be taxed for those children as a result. They should be willing to pay for the black babies or the white methhead's children since they want them on this earth so much whereas the parents may not. Let the anti-abortion supporters pick up the tab. Besides, every single problem we face today is because of overpopulation and an increasing birth rate. That is the root cause of all man made problems.
Furthermore this video explains why abortion is very important to society and making sure it stays legal.
-
Plants are living and have organs with living and growing tissue.
I think all the people who want to force mother's to have unborn should be taxed for those children as a result. They should be willing to pay for the black babies or the white methhead's children since they want them on this earth so much whereas the parents may not. Let the anti-abortion supporters pick up the tab. Besides, every single problem we face today is because of overpopulation and an increasing birth rate. That is the root cause of all man made problems.
Furthermore this video explains why abortion is very important to society and making sure it stays legal.
I love how it's "black babies" but "white methheads"
-
I was a bit shocked by that number, so I did some research. It's a universally accepted figure and a shocking one at that, to be sure. But let's take a step back for a second and look at the numbers.
According to the United Nations, about 21,000 people die of hunger or hunger-related causes every day. Let's round that number down to 20,000. This works out to 7,300,000 deaths per year, almost all of which could have been prevented. And this 7,300,000 figure doesn't include the those who die because they lack access to clean water (another million deaths per year), or they contract of malaria transmitted by mosquitoes (another 500,000 deaths per year), or they contract measles, rubella, pertussis, or diphtheria (a few hundred thousand deaths per year).
So, a little over 8,000,000 of our fellow humans die of hunger and dirty water every year. About 15 of them will die during the time it will take you to read this post. Let that sink in for a moment.
That's not to say that we should just whitewash the approximately 1,000,000 abortions per year happening in the United States. But I do find it interesting - and a bit sad - that people who are so intensely devoted to fighting for the "unborn" don't wish to care for or help the born...
I'll play devils advocate.
this is the exact argument that the original pro choice advocates back in the 1970's said that they would not use. the fear from conservatives was that abortion would become a tool for social engineering. Orwellian type shit. destroying the sanctity of human life. Pro choice advocates in the 1970's called these conservatives fuckin wackjobs and said that abortion was a last resort for women in trouble, not a tool for social engineering. They were crazy to think that this procedure would be used for a purpose like that.
time heals all though. now no one remembers that and here we are in 2015 and this is the go to argument for most pro choice advocates.
at the end of the day, killing people is ALWAYS easier than taking care of them.
I don't feel good about where this line of reasoning is going.
I thought abortion was about helping women in need? now its about social engineering?
-
very simple
if you're against abortion then you are free to choose not to have one
if you don't have a womb then you don't get a choice
-
I thought abortion was about helping women in need? now its about social engineering?
Planned Parenthood was founded by a woman in part for the purpose of social engineering.
-
very simple
if you're against abortion then you are free to choose not to have one
if you don't have a womb then you don't get a choice
Sounds fair.
-
I was a bit shocked by that number, so I did some research. It's a universally accepted figure and a shocking one at that, to be sure. But let's take a step back for a second and look at the numbers.
According to the United Nations, about 21,000 people die of hunger or hunger-related causes every day. Let's round that number down to 20,000. This works out to 7,300,000 deaths per year, almost all of which could have been prevented. And this 7,300,000 figure doesn't include the those who die because they lack access to clean water (another million deaths per year), or they contract of malaria transmitted by mosquitoes (another 500,000 deaths per year), or they contract measles, rubella, pertussis, or diphtheria (a few hundred thousand deaths per year).
So, a little over 8,000,000 of our fellow humans die of hunger and dirty water every year. About 15 of them will die during the time it will take you to read this post. Let that sink in for a moment.
That's not to say that we should just whitewash the approximately 1,000,000 abortions per year happening in the United States. But I do find it interesting - and a bit sad - that people who are so intensely devoted to fighting for the "unborn" don't wish to care for or help the born...
We need people to die in fact we need people to die at a faster rate then they are now...Look at things like the US oil consumption and look at the use of resources we have, and resources readily available in the world compared to how much we consume...We can't keep doing this....Look at all the forests being chopped down to build houses...How they're cramming suburbs that used to have tons of yards between each house...they're building condos everywhere...Constructio n workers at an all-time high in the cities and the job for tradesmen and nurses outlook is pretty significant in the future as far as demand goes...We cannot cut off those resources of killing people justifiably...This is the harsh truth..We need this
-
very simple
if you're against abortion then you are free to choose not to have one
if you don't have a womb then you don't get a choice
what choice does the baby have?
all these pro'choice' arguments are wrong on their face because it completely takes away responsibility from the individual (a common theme in the democrat party ::))
-
Planned Parenthood was founded by a woman in part for the purpose of social engineering.
explain, please.
-
explain, please.
www.google.com
-
what choice does the baby have?
all these pro'choice' arguments are wrong on their face because it completely takes away responsibility from the individual (a common theme in the democrat party ::))
what baby
also having an abortion can be a very responsible act by an individual so perfectly in line with that imaginary belief you have about the democratic party
-
www.google.com
yeah, i didn't think you'd be able to back up that social engineering thing.
-
yeah, i didn't think you'd be able to back up that social engineering thing.
Nah. That's just me telling a dishonest troll (you) to go pound sand.
-
How does aborting a pre-fetus/fetus that isn't mature any different than me sniping my cum into my girlfriends face??? If you're religious it's sinning either way...I'm killing more potential babies by ejaculating onto her face to be truthful....Might as well abort as many babies as we can to save more supplies on earth and free land...If i'm only gonna live one life here on earth it might as well be the best one possible...I certainly don't wanna be in a world where i have to worry about unborn babies who would have grown up in a time where i was already dead and buried... (semi serious)
-
We need people to die in fact we need people to die at a faster rate then they are now...Look at things like the US oil consumption and look at the use of resources we have, and resources readily available in the world compared to how much we consume...We can't keep doing this....Look at all the forests being chopped down to build houses...How they're cramming suburbs that used to have tons of yards between each house...they're building condos everywhere...Constructio n workers at an all-time high in the cities and the job for tradesmen and nurses outlook is pretty significant in the future as far as demand goes...We cannot cut off those resources of killing people justifiably...This is the harsh truth..We need this
+1
-
www.google.com
If you make a claim - as you have - then you should be willing to back it up. Redirecting someone to google is just flat out silly. You tell someone to google answers. Not positions.
But then again, you aren't here to discuss and debate, are you?
-
what baby
also having an abortion can be a very responsible act by an individual so perfectly in line with that imaginary belief you have about the democratic party
the one that is being killed and cut up, you know, the ones you guys are in denial about ::)
-
the one that is being killed and cut up, you know, the ones you guys are in denial about ::)
Is a fertilized ovum a baby? If not, at what point does it become a baby?
-
If you make a claim - as you have - then you should be willing to back it up. Redirecting someone to google is just flat out silly. You tell someone to google answers. Not positions.
But then again, you aren't here to discuss and debate, are you?
If I am talking to a dishonest troll, I will tell him to go do his own homework. If you don't like that approach, that is a you problem.
I discuss and debate all the time. The level of discourse depends on the person I'm talking too.
-
If I am talking to a dishonest troll, I will tell him to go do his own homework. If you don't like that approach, that is a you problem.
I discuss and debate all the time. The level of discourse depends on the person I'm talking too.
it's his homework to provide proof of your claim
that's a great debate tactic ....for a second grader (actually not even then)
-
the one that is being killed and cut up, you know, the ones you guys are in denial about ::)
nothing to deny except pretending that a fertilized egg or even a fetus is a baby
-
How does aborting a pre-fetus/fetus that isn't mature any different than me sniping my cum into my girlfriends face??? If you're religious it's sinning either way...I'm killing more potential babies by ejaculating onto her face to be truthful....Might as well abort as many babies as we can to save more supplies on earth and free land...If i'm only gonna live one life here on earth it might as well be the best one possible...I certainly don't wanna be in a world where i have to worry about unborn babies who would have grown up in a time where i was already dead and buried... (semi serious)
The only beef I have with this post is that I would never cum on a girlfriend or wife's face. This is why you always have a pig or two on the side.
-
If I am talking to a dishonest troll, I will tell him to go do his own homework. If you don't like that approach, that is a you problem.
Wait... can two trolls talk with each other?!
I discuss and debate all the time.
I'm not sure that what you do can be described as discussing or debating. The word I'm thinking of starts with a T.
-
Wait... can two trolls talk with each other?!
I'm not sure that what you do can be described as discussing or debating. The word I'm thinking of starts with a T.
Good question. Do you talk to yourself??
Sure it is. Just like you, even when you lose your ability to type without insulting people, are still discussing and debating.
-
Good question. Do you talk to yourself??
Sure it is. Just like you, even when you lose your ability to type without insulting people, are still discussing and debating.
Calling a spade a spade isn't an insult.
-
Calling a spade a spade isn't an insult.
Really? So all those times you call people names on the board is just calling a spade a spade? Well thanks for that clarification Morton Downy, Jr.
-
Really? So all those times you call people names on the board is just calling a spade a spade? Well thanks for that clarification Morton Downy, Jr.
Feel free to show me a case where my words were inappropriate.
-
Feel free to show me a case where my words were inappropriate.
Dude. You're asking me to go find instances where you called people names, lost your cool, etc.? Are you really trying to say you have not done that?
-
Dude. You're asking me to go find instances where you called people names, lost your cool, etc.? Are you really trying to say you have not done that?
No - I'm saying that you should point out instances where I called someone a name that you feel was inappropriate. Have I called people stupid? I have. Have I called them idiots? I have. Have I called them buffoons? I have. I stand behind what I said: if someone is being stupid, I'll call him stupid. If someone is acting like an idiot, I'll call him an idiot. If someone is a buffoon, I'll call him a buffoon.
If you want to go find instances that prove otherwise, then go for it. It's Friday and the night is young...
-
Is a fertilized ovum a baby? If not, at what point does it become a baby?
I'd say that although the chances are slim, they can live at 25 weeks. Like I said in the beginning, I don't like the idea of it but think it should be the woman's choice. Do you have children?
-
Either it is or it isn't murder, and I think that is where the conversation has to begin.
-
Either it is or it isn't murder, and I think that is where the conversation has to begin.
Murder involves the premeditated killing of a human being. If you want to focus on the murder question, you must answer another one first: is a fertilized ovum is a human being, and if not, when does it becomes one?
-
Murder involves the premeditated killing of a human being. If you want to focus on the murder question, you must answer another one first: is a fertilized ovum is a human being, and if not, when does it becomes one?
If we can't justifiably kill humans, then why does the death penalty exist??
-
If we can't justifiably kill humans, then why does the death penalty exist??
I didn't argue that we can't justifiably kill humans - we can. But if we are going to discuss whether abortion is murder - which is the unlawful, premeditated killing of a human being - then we need to ask the question: is the fertilized ovum a human being?
-
"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception). Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]
https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html
-
"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception). Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]
https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html
It marks the beginning of human development, yes, but is it a human being? Well it has the DNA of a human being, but then again, so do skin tags (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrochordon) but it's ok to remove those.
-
If we can't justifiably kill humans, then why does the death penalty exist??
seriously comparing death row convicts who have knowingly made their own terrible choices including murdering innocent people, to a human life that is completely innocent and hasn't even had a chance to even make its own decisions yet?
it is hard to have a serious debate with someone who can fail to grasp such basic things as a starting point..the whole point of the death penalty is to remove dangerous people from society because they kill and hurt others. abortion is taking a life which is completely innocent and killing it for the sake of convenience. does this key difference really need to be explained??
-
Abortion is wrong.
I don't know at what point its murder, although IMO i think if the baby is aborted at a time when it can survive outside the womb its definitely murder.
That being said i don't think it should be illegal in the first few weeks of pregnancy. Women can make that decision and deal with the consequences with their maker.
Also, the welfare system would get majorly taxed and back alley abortions would become a problem.
You fucking Bible thumpers need to just shut the fuck up and live your own lives cause fact is most of you are hypocrites one way or another anyway.
-
Abortion is right. The last thing the US needs is more people.
-
Abortion is right. The last thing the US needs is more people.
Genocide is right. the last thing the Earth needs is more people.
-
Genocide is right. the last thing the Earth needs is more people.
we could use about 3 billion less.
-
I didn't argue that we can't justifiably kill humans - we can. But if we are going to discuss whether abortion is murder - which is the unlawful, premeditated killing of a human being - then we need to ask the question: is the fertilized ovum a human being?
if the fetus is developed far enough to where a doctor can perform heart surgery on it to save its LIFE is it a life then?
or does it have to be delivered? does it have to be out of the womb to be alive? now everyone knows that there's ZERO physiological difference between a live baby that was born 2 minutes ago and a baby that is 5-6 months into gestation. They're both viable human beings. but the law still ignores that in some states. so neither side wants to rely on science to determine when a life begins because it blows both sides definitions out of the water.
I just don't like it when liberal pro choice people try and use science to mock and ridicule the opinion of pro lifers that life begins at conception. because their definition of when a life begins is just as laughable and arbitrary.
-
we could use about 3 billion less.
don't you worry. we'll get there.
-
if the fetus is developed far enough to where a doctor can perform heart surgery on it to save its LIFE is it a life then?
Perhaps but this is a bit of a red herring. The simple fact is that not all life is equal. Plants, for example, are alive and we "kill" them by the billions. Cats are alive and we put them down by the truckload. So - and please pardon my use of the word "ok" - it seems that some lives are "ok" to terminate. So clearly, whether the fetus is "a life" or not isn't the salient point. Indeed, what comes into play is personhood. In other words, is the fetus a person?
Well... maybe. Consider the example I mentioned previously: a fetus which has hydranencephaly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydranencephaly). This means that the fetus doesn't actually have a brain - the space inside its skull is simply full of cerebro-spinal fluid. A baby born with this condition survived to age 12 (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/08/31/boy-born-without-a-brain-_n_5743844.html). It was undeniably alive. But what it a person? I submit that it was not. The essence of what we are is our brain - it's what makes you, you - and the body is just a portable life-support system for that brain.
To prove to yourself that this is the material difference, consider how differently we treat a human who requires life support to live but is brain-dead vs. one that is not brain dead. Both are humans and both are alive. One is a person and one is not. It's acceptable to unplug one, but it's not acceptable to unplug the other.
So the question to ask is: is a fetus a person? I think that we can be fairly certain that prior to about 10 weeks, the fetus is not a person: the brain hasn't yet developed. After that, the situation becomes a bit fuzzier.
or does it have to be delivered? does it have to be out of the womb to be alive? now everyone knows that there's ZERO physiological difference between a live baby that was born 2 minutes ago and a baby that is 5-6 months into gestation. They're both viable human beings. but the law still ignores that in some states. so neither side wants to rely on science to determine when a life begins because it blows both sides definitions out of the water.
Again, the problem isn't when life begins - a question which science can definitively answer. The problem is when does personhood begin? Things there are fuzzy. Science can tell you when a brain forms and when it electrical patterns typical of conscious humans are present. What you do with that information is up to you.
I just don't like it when liberal pro choice people try and use science to mock and ridicule the opinion of pro lifers that life begins at conception. because their definition of when a life begins is just as laughable and arbitrary.
Well, to be fair, it's a pretty laughable claim that a zygote is a human baby, for exactly the same reason that it's laughable to claim that an olive pit is an olive tree. It can develop into one, but it isn't one now.
I'll leave you with a question. Assume, for a moment, that we all agreed that fetus is not only alive but that it's person from the moment a single spermatozoon fertilized an ovum. What does that mean for abortion? Can a woman be forced to carry a pregnancy to term? Does she lose the right to self-determination and to exercise control over the body? Is she, in essence, to be seen as nothing more than a walking, talking incubator?
-
No - I'm saying that you should point out instances where I called someone a name that you feel was inappropriate. Have I called people stupid? I have. Have I called them idiots? I have. Have I called them buffoons? I have. I stand behind what I said: if someone is being stupid, I'll call him stupid. If someone is acting like an idiot, I'll call him an idiot. If someone is a buffoon, I'll call him a buffoon.
If you want to go find instances that prove otherwise, then go for it. It's Friday and the night is young...
You just confirmed what I said. I'm not interested in seeing whether you think calling people stupid, etc. is "appropriate." Don't really care. Not the point I was making.
-
Murder involves the premeditated killing of a human being. If you want to focus on the murder question, you must answer another one first: is a fertilized ovum is a human being, and if not, when does it becomes one?
I actually agree with this, except for the premeditated part.
-
I actually agree with this, except for the premeditated part.
What do you not agree with? You're saying murder doesn't require premeditation?
-
What do you not agree with? You're saying murder doesn't require premeditation?
First degree does. Second degree murder does not.
-
First degree does. Second degree murder does not.
So your definition is the 2nd degree murder only.
Which is a legal definition not the definition of the word by itself of Murder.
Murder is defined as premeditation.
When you say "2nd degree murder" in terms of a legal charge, it's not the same.
-
So your definition is the 2nd degree murder only.
Which is a legal definition not the definition of the word by itself of Murder.
Murder is defined as premeditation.
When you say "2nd degree murder" in terms of a legal charge, it's not the same.
Like I said, you like to argue about stupid stuff.
-
Like I said, you like to argue about stupid stuff.
I don't consider defining words properly, "stupid".
Perhaps you just like to be lazy in your communication, but that's your issue, not mine.
-
:D
-
:D
Doh! Family Guy approved. :-X
-
:D
Nice :)
-
Perhaps but this is a bit of a red herring. The simple fact is that not all life is equal. Plants, for example, are alive and we "kill" them by the billions. Cats are alive and we put them down by the truckload. So - and please pardon my use of the word "ok" - it seems that some lives are "ok" to terminate. So clearly, whether the fetus is "a life" or not isn't the salient point. Indeed, what comes into play is personhood. In other words, is the fetus a person?
Well... maybe. Consider the example I mentioned previously: a fetus which has hydranencephaly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydranencephaly). This means that the fetus doesn't actually have a brain - the space inside its skull is simply full of cerebro-spinal fluid. A baby born with this condition survived to age 12 (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/08/31/boy-born-without-a-brain-_n_5743844.html). It was undeniably alive. But what it a person? I submit that it was not. The essence of what we are is our brain - it's what makes you, you - and the body is just a portable life-support system for that brain.
To prove to yourself that this is the material difference, consider how differently we treat a human who requires life support to live but is brain-dead vs. one that is not brain dead. Both are humans and both are alive. One is a person and one is not. It's acceptable to unplug one, but it's not acceptable to unplug the other.
So the question to ask is: is a fetus a person? I think that we can be fairly certain that prior to about 10 weeks, the fetus is not a person: the brain hasn't yet developed. After that, the situation becomes a bit fuzzier.
Again, the problem isn't when life begins - a question which science can definitively answer. The problem is when does personhood begin? Things there are fuzzy. Science can tell you when a brain forms and when it electrical patterns typical of conscious humans are present. What you do with that information is up to you.
Well, to be fair, it's a pretty laughable claim that a zygote is a human baby, for exactly the same reason that it's laughable to claim that an olive pit is an olive tree. It can develop into one, but it isn't one now.
I'll leave you with a question. Assume, for a moment, that we all agreed that fetus is not only alive but that it's person from the moment a single spermatozoon fertilized an ovum. What does that mean for abortion? Can a woman be forced to carry a pregnancy to term? Does she lose the right to self-determination and to exercise control over the body? Is she, in essence, to be seen as nothing more than a walking, talking incubator?
I think you've proven my point with this response. you have a definitive opinion on what definitely is NOT a baby and frankly I tend to agree with you. But just like you've said after the brain develops and into the 4th 5th month of gestation you agree that the situation gets fuzzy. and I agree again. but the pro choice movement completely ignores your opinion on it being fuzzy and takes the position that a baby 4-5 months into gestation is considered a life if AND ONLY IF the mother WANTS it to live.
and the law takes the position that a baby 4-5 months into gestation can be killed in a clinic legally but a baby born 5 minutes ago, biologically speaking the same as the former, can not be killed legally. one woman is a patient, the other a murderer.
I think that distinction is laughable. unless you want to keep science out of it and base the decision purely on emotional reasons. essentially the law is based on the fact that once we can actually see the baby outside the womb, now its a life. and I think you would agree that that is not a scientific opinion but an opinion based on emotion. babies outside the womb are cute. babies inside the womb are not because you can't see what they are yet.
so again as the idea that it is a baby the moment a single spermatozoon fertilizes an ovum is laughable, so is the idea that a baby in the late 2nd or early 3rd trimester is NOT a baby is just as laughable.
I'm just saying that we don't have this figured out.........at all. but we rationalize it by arguing that it benefits society to kill the ones that are not wanted. which of course it does. it always benefits society to get rid of a million or 2 million people a year....always.