@loathedandabhorred that is the one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. It shows how little and immature you and your opinion really are. My 4 month daughter has the same mannerisms now than when she was in the womb(when seen from the ultrasounds). Do you think that just because you pass through the birth canal you become a human being? No, there is no difference between a baby in the womb and a baby out of the womb, the only thing separating the two is the sac, muscle and skin.
Ana, you say that everything that makes you human is present in a zygote...are you retarded? Not meaning as an insult, but literally, are you? Go back to school, read up on the topic of abortion and fetal development...Aren't you embarrassed, saying such stupid things? You should be. It is your choice to be a total idiot, but come on, the information is literally at your fingertips. :p
@purplelov114 do you have any kids? Do you not think that while in the womb that baby dosen't have feelings, thoughts or even a personality already because they do! They already have a heart beat! Think about it.
@RevJhow12 Of course a fetus doesn't have thoughts feelings or personality, come on dude, get a bloody grip. An earthworm has a heartbeat, are you going to argue that it is equal to human life? A fetus is not developed as a human being, it is simply human potential. Try considering the rights of babies to be wanted, loved, valued rather than your own overemotional ridiculous little opinion. Women are capable of judging for themselves whether their own pregnancy is a blessing or a curse.
ABORTION IS NOT COMPARABLE TO KILLING A NEWBORN. Newborns have taken there first breathes. Prior to being born, a newborn is part of its mother and so therefore it is its mother's choice if she wishes to abort. Abortion does not allow for a newborn to be killed. abortion is also not comparable to killing a 40-year old for much more obvious reasons. A forty-year old is its own person with thoughts, feeling and emotion. It's mother certainly can't kill it! This women's argument is invalid.
The woman in the video also considers a fetus as "life" as a human being and abortion as killing but men would be killers each day and women each month because of sperm/ovum as DNA which is also mixed already. Without the development of a brain it is still relativly big DNA at some point but for certain reasons no "life" to me and that's not cruel at all. How can no pain be cruel?
I think when the brain is not developed already abortion is okay because it causes no pain. Giving birth would cause pain for both in many ways. Is the biological process better at making a decision over a life which already exists than a brain? I don't like some of the pro-life activists because some try to manipulate with simply wrong "knowledge". Adoption is no argument because the planet already "offers" children who need parents. The "would be" is not logical, no "is", but just thought.
Here is the slippery slope about abortion. If you say that the person isn't fully developed, a person does not stop developing throughout his or her life up until physical death and then everything breaks down. This by default makes murder against a person outside of the womb no longer a crime, but if you claim it is wrong to murder, then you have a double standard.
All of these arguments depends on a purely physical definition of a human being. Sure, the species Homo Sapien is defined by a typical genetic code and certain physiological traits, but that isn't what makes us "human". Fetuses may be genetically human, but they lack the trait that makes us essentially "human".
P.S. @LiveActionFilms, If you are honestly looking for good reasons to abandon the pro-life camp, then message me. I promise to better acquaint you with a strong pro-choice position.
@AlexanderDGraham a baby is a baby even at conception and abortion is murder no matter how you candy coat it its wrong and there is nothing you can say to make it right
@BossLikesShenanigans I know that it is an essential quality. I want to know what this essential quality is. What distinguishes this quality from other qualities, such as redness or roughness. Also, being composed of cells cannot be the essential quality that makes a human a human. All animals have cells, but only one animal is human.
Not so sure she would be saying that if she got raped and got pregnant. But hey atleast she lets us guys of the hook, cause 99,9% of the men in world are mass murderer with that reasoning.
@BadCynic It violates human rights by extinguishing a human life without the consent of that human. As a civilized society, we should not permit "letting people decide what the fuck they want to do" when what they want to do is tantamount to murder.
Well that's the thing. The early forms are not human. They do, however hold the potential to become a human. Later stages shouldn't even be considered. However, early stages not only lack a brain, but they also feed simply by absorbing nutrients. They can't see, they can't feel, they merely exist. Like the shit I wipe off my ass. Besides, we can justify killing all other forms of life for one reason or other. Do you like chicken? How about bacon? I like bacon.
Well that's the thing. The early forms are not human. They do, however hold the potential to become a human. Later stages shouldn't even be considered. However, early stages not only lack a brain, but they also feed simply by absorbing nutrients. They can't see, they can't feel, they merely exist. Like the shit I wipe off my ass. Besides, we can justify killing all other forms of life for one reason or other. Do you like chicken? How about bacon? I like bacon.
@BadCynic Yes, there certainly are still rapists and murderers raping and murdering today. Abortion violates human rights because the fetus has a right to life.
Would you defend the bacteria I wash off my hands? This should be a matter of choice because people are incapable of coming to a consensus, and as long as no humans are harmed then I see no problems here. Only the self righteous, too lazy to do any research.
I think its only justifiable if the child is going to die within a few days of birth and will suffer in those days or some circumstance in which its life will definitely bring more pain than good but in general cases, trivial reasons should not be used to justify abortion.
I think we should focus on getting the message out stopping people having sex without protection if they don't even want to have children, if we overcome that, the problem is almost resolved.
Im already fighting for human rights im pro choice. No human being has the right to remain inside the body of another human being against that person's will. There is no right to be born.
Spermatozoa, zygotes, embroyos and fetuses do not have rights that supercede those of the woman carrying them. The government forcing a women or a little girl to be pregnant for 9 months and bear a child against their will that is slavery that is wrong.
@MrsTaySwiftFan13 threatening, the availability of legal abortion has helped avert serious medical complications that could have resulted from childbirth. Before legal abortion, such women's choices were limited to dangerous illegal abortion or dangerous childbirth Outlaw abortion, and more children will bear children a 12 year old kid 14 15 should not be a mother forcing a child to give birth to another child is child abuse
@MrsTaySwiftFan13 A fetus is not a baby or a child just for the record its a genetic blueprint a child is defined as a fully develop entity that has been born and has independent body functions why would a women choose an abortion there are a lot of reasons Legal abortions protect womens health Legal abortion not only protects women lives it also protects their health For tens of thousands of women with heart disease kidney disease and other illnesses that can be life
@animejerk05 Huh, a genetic blueprint is DNA, not a fetus. Also, you're as likely to die from abortions as you are 'being' pregnant. You're literally ripping out a piece of your body, unnaturally, which also causes scarring. Enough abortions can cause infertility, barring you from ever having children.
@JessesanMan No your not. From safe abortions you will not die from it most abortions takes place within the first 2 trimesters 95%. It will not cause inferility and it will not bare you from furure children. Only late term unsafe abortions cause death and major damage. And most women get unsafe abortion because of anti abortions laws making it hard difficult and or impossible to get an safe early term 1.
OH and you can kill people at any point in time. It is arbitrary as long as the laws support it. You can kill a man trying to take food so he doesnt starve to death. The fact that its legal doesnt make it any less arbitrary. I could use the argument that "well shouldnt we not kill that man and help him because hes just hungry" :_) A woman might abort a fetus for doing the same to her. Its "stealing" food from her body, against her will.
This woman is using purely self-serving arguments.
ROFL so if the "brightest and the best" cant defend their arguments that means their arguments arent trustworthy? Isnt that true of anyone? All pro-lifers should be ready to apply that argument to themselves.
Every trait a human has a zygote has? Pure myth. An engine is not a car, so a fetus is not a person. Human being? Depends on ur definition. Whatever you want to say the notion of pro or anti abortion has to do with personal choice and not some objective "right" and "wrong". We can talk about objective relative morality in general, but hardly in a way to apply a simple wrong or right to one side or the other.
When you subscribe to situational ethics the righteousness of everything, from boiling babies to poisoning children with mercury to cluster-bombing clinics to irradiating tumors and commuters, is relative. The worms, by now, have finished with Carl Sagan as he's up to his pits in arms—face-down in a piny box...
Even science says that life begins at fertilization (also known as conception). So than it should be murder right? But for most people who defend abortion it still isn't murder, this proves that this is a morallity question rather than a scientific question. Thus, as this is so controversial, we should rather be safe than sorry.
Even Dr. Landrum Shettles and many other professors say life begins at concpetion. Look for it. Bye!
["This is the scientific reality that the seeds of all common fruits (except citrus) contain vitamin B17, an anti-cancer vitamin. If we ingest proper quantities of these vitamins, either in the pure form or through ingesting the nitrilosidic foods, we will be able to prevent cancer just as surely as we are able to prevent scurvy by the use of vitamin C or pernicious anemia by the use of vitamin B12." — Ernest Krebs, Jr.]
[Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"; Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it." — "60 Minutes" (5/12/96)]
So according to you, it would be better for a baby to be born in a situation where the mother got knocked up by a dead beat alcoholic who abuses her and will end up abusing the child rather then just aborting it when the brain waves and nerve endings of the so called "baby" aren't even developed enough to feel no pain. That's really humane of you.
@luv2scream815 Yea, let's kill babies because their fathers are assholes! Brilliant idea. It's not like we could possibly develope and stregnthen domestic abuse recognition\intervention proficiency and instill a sense of communal responsibility to get involved.
People who can't feel pain are shit, I agree! So what if it's temporary? We should be able to kill people who are anesthetized or unconscious too. Life is hard so let's just end their suffering before they regain their senses.
@Hatrimn It's not a baby its a fetus. Their is a gigantic difference and if you paid attention in sophomore year biology instead of burning Steven Hawking books and holding up signs that say "God hates fags" outside your church you would probably understand that.
@luv2scream815 LOL yea you have to be religious to understand what a human being is, and that killing it is wrong.
There is also a gigantic difference between a baby and an adult, so what? A fetus is an individual specimen belonging to the H. sapien species, aka a person. I guess your biology class didn't cover that?
@Hatrimn So to you if you got a sonogram done and saw that the fetus was missing all its limbs you would still have it? I dont think so. A fetus is not a human. Just because it has a heart beat dosent make it human. Primates, insects, every living thing has a heart beat.
@luv2scream815 Wow, way to insult all living amputees. Of course I would still have it, I'm not a murderous cretin and I don't foolishly believe that limbs are the key to a happy fulfilling life.
A fetus is not a human, but a newborn is? Is this based on brain development? Exactly how many neurons and glial cells are required in order to be deemed a human?
@Hatrimn Generally, if the human has nothing wrong with him mentally or physically, it starts off with either two xx chromosomes, which would make it a girl, and two xy cells. Once being fully developed it will have 46 cells.
@Hatrimn When a fetus is first conceived it either receives an x or y chromosome. If it has XY chromosomes it comes out a boy, if it has two Y chromosomes it comes out a girl. When a baby is fully developed it will have 46 chromosomes.
@luv2scream815 What the hell are you blabbering about? A fetus does have 46 chromosomes. Someone must have lied to you and said only fetuses that don't have 46 chromosomes are aborted?
@Hatrimn Lets say it does have 46 chromosomes. That still dosent make a fetus a human being. Alot of special needs children have 45 or 47 chromosomes. Are they not human? A fetus isnt developed enough to be called a person, and by taking the right to abort away is taking the right of choice away.
@luv2scream815 Again, why is a newborn considered human but a fetus isn't? You brought up 46 chromosomes and XY sex determination and that failed miserably.
Abortion is murder until reasonably shown otherwise, and so to take the "right to abort" away does not hinder the "right of choice" anymore than taking the "right to rape" or the "right to steal" away does.
there should not be a law regarding abortion. we dont create laws because of morality, but because if we didnt society would be full of chaos. people should be able to do whatever they want.
@toSTONEiGO Why do we have laws against killing newborns? How is the chaos caused or not caused by that different than killing the child right before birth or while half born?
@LiveActionFilms The idea that killing newborns is wrong is so old that nobody, including me, questions it. Therefore, it is only natural that there is a law against it. Perhaps if killing newborns was an ancient practice used until today, there would be moral debate on it too. Perhaps it would be legal. Since abortion has just as many people on one side as the other, and I believe it is wrong to impose your own morals on someone else, people should be able to choose their own beliefs.
@LiveActionFilms It actually is a matter of an idea of correct morality. According to you, a human life requires protection once the fetus is conceived, and according to me, protecting life is required once the baby is able to be born. Using neither factual nor emotional arguments can change someone's opinion on the matter.
@LiveActionFilms Personhood at conception is a religious belief, not a provable biological fact Judaism holds that it begins at birth and abortion is not murder The religious community will never reach consensus on the definition of a “person” or when abortion is morally justified. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF WHATS SO EVER THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION ITS ONLY A THEORY. some people beleive life starts when you can feel pain. Some believe that life starts when you have a brain.
@animejerk05 "THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF WHATS SO EVER THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION"
It is a scientific fact. Go look at any college level textbook. We love science.
And personhood is not a scientific concept but a legal one. Science had no opinion on when personhood starts. Science can tell you want is but it cannot tell you what laws should be.
Since you seem to disagree with mainstream science, when do you think life beings from a scientific standpoint?
@LiveActionFilms I said personhood very different from being Human in Dna terms. Of course a fetus have the Dna of a human eye color ect. But just note that human hair have all those things as well. Either way i was simply stated that a fetus is physical dependent to the mother for survival before viability Since its not a independent existance it cannot have equal rights to the mother.
@LiveActionFilms A new born does have independent existance Being physically dependent on someone and being Socially dependent on someone are two different things A fetus is actually physically attached to a mother and dependent on her body for life support so it cant be a independent existance A new born is not physically attached to anyone Of course its Socially dependent on Society to take care of it but the difference is that it is not an physical attachment
@animejerk05 "A fetus is actually physically attached to a mother and dependent on her body..."
LOL, so conjoined twins who share vital organs cannot have equal rights either eh? Their physiological dependence must mean they aren't people. Brilliant.
And why is social dependence an exception to your rule? How is being dependent on a mother all that different from being dependent on an incubator or any other life support in determining personhood?
@Hatrimn alright most conjoined twins are seperated immidiantly after birth. And being dependent on a incubator is very different from being physically dependent on the mother. for one your not infriging on anyone rights while your on the respirator. But while your physically dependent you may be infriging on her rights. You dont know the situation of every woman you dont know why she wants an abortion Forcing a woman to carry a a child she doesnt want is infrigment of her civil liberties
@animejerk05 You didn't address the point of my rebuttal. Are conjoined twins who share vital organs people or aren't they?
So if you infringe on someone else's rights, even if involuntarily (like a fetus), then you aren't a person? Is that what you're suggesting? Does that mean I would be justified in killing all petty thieves?
How does not knowing a murderer's motive excuse their murder? And since when do civil liberties include murder?
@animejerk05 I have domain over my house, but if a child was inside of it, then I would be accountable if that child were harmed due to my actions or negligence. And do you not realize that what you just said there gives mothers free rein to consume alcohol and other toxins despite it having adverse on the child post parturition? You are condoning child abuse, along with murder, based on a poorly conceived notion of liberty.
@Hatrimn 2 completly different things here an example if there a child in the house and you want to smoke or consume alcohol then you can drive away and smoke outside or consume alchol somewere else and the child wont be harmed you dont have to give up smoking and you can move the child from your house give him to your grandma then do what ever u want in the house But while your pregnet everything you do directly affects the fetus are you saying that woman who drink or smoke while pregnet
@animejerk05 A variance in inconvenience does not make them two completely different things. Neither situations are permanent. Bother hypothetical mothers must refrain from doing anything to harm the child, the pregnant mother just has to be more consistent for the duration of the responsibility.
The punishment should fit the severity of the crime, like any other case of child abuse.
@Hatrimn If the first mother doesnt want to give up smoking drinking or any other risky behavior she enjoys no matter what she always have the right to reliquish the responsibilities of being the caregiver then she can continue her lifestyle as she pleases The 2nd potental mother is absolutley forced to have the responsiblities because the fetus is attached to her the first mother has options the 2nd does not The 2nd mother cannot give up the responsiblities and pass it on to another.
@animejerk05 Just because the first mother's options are more immediate, that doesn't mean the second mother is without options. Her situation is not permanent.
Do you even realize you're arguing for extinguishing an innocent human life for the sake of convenience?
"Boohoo, I don't have options, I'm stuck with this kid for 9 months, unless of course I kill it!" Brilliant...
@Hatrimn There is no scientific consensus as to when human life begins. It is a matter of philosophic opinion or religious belief. Human life is a continuum sperm and eggs are also alive, and represent potential human beings but virtually all sperm and eggs are wasted. Also two-thirds of human conceptions are spontaneously aborted by nature Many religions such as Judaism holds that life begins at birth and abortion is not murder Personhood at conception is a religious belief not a provable fact
@animejerk05 Yes there is a consensus as to when a human life begins, it is when an organism that can be classified H. sapien is created (aka conception). The only debate to speak of pertains to personhood (the principle of equality), and discourse has always been distorted by those who wish to withhold personhood from another group of people (ie minorities, homosexuals, the disabled, fetuses, etc). Their arguments are fallacious, discriminatory, and have an ever decreasing shelf life.
@Hatrimn Oh a discriminatory group two-thirds of your discriminatory group are spontaneously aborted by nature Its called a miscarriage. My cousin went through 6 of those so far she got pregnant 6 times and she has yet to have even 1 baby. Btw she wants 1. A women who doesnt want to be a mother who chooses to have an abortion within the 1st few trimisters isnt doing any thing wrong. No matter what way you slice a potental life doesnt have any rights there called potental life for a reason.
@animejerk05 LOL so because a group is greatly susceptible to dieing off naturally, they lose consideration for personhood? "Sorry cancer patients, your condition renders your personhood questionable. Why? Because you're probably gonna die anyways silly!"
It's called a "potential life" because it hasn't developed the common traits that the species is known to possess. Newborns are "potential lives" too.... again, what is your point?
@Hatrimn If you consider a zygote and full human being then stem celled research would also have to stop because doctors use donated sperm and woman egg cells and combine them in a lab all the time. Never mind that this research as the potental to save thousands of lives and cure major illnesses. But hey all zygotes are full human beings so a man and woman cant donate sperm and egg cells in the name of medicine also birth control would also have to stop because they destroy sperm cells before
@animejerk05 LOL, for one thing, stem cell research is not limited to plundering embryonic and fetal stem cells. Secondly, no research warrants the murder of innocent people.
Gametes are not humans, they are reproductive cells, therefore contraception that only affects gametes is not immoral. If a zygote is intentionally destroyed, then it is tantamount to murder.
You're a complete idiot if you don't see how murdering ANYONE is wrong.
@Hatrimn Your on crack if you think that destroying a zygote is akin to murder. Women and men have millions of sperm and egg cells. Really if a woman or a man donated a couple cells in order to produce medicine that might be able to cure terminally ill paitents or people in severe pain you would be againist it. every month a woman loses an egg during her cycle. And when a man masterbates thousands of sperm cells are wasted. But using a few in the name of science is immoral BULLSHIT
@animejerk05 I just told you that gametes are not humans, thus killing them is not murder, so your ramblings about sperm and eggs is useless.
Zygotes on the other hand are humans. You can try to downplay the value of zygotes all you want, and I could do the same with newborns using the same poor reasoning, but it doesn't change what they are.
@Hatrimn Quit your bullshit. So basically I can do what ever I want with my sperm a woman anything she wants with her egg. But if me and my girlfriend decides to combine them for even one second then we throw it away we commited an act of murder What kind of nonsense bullshit is that You prolifers are full of crap
@animejerk05 Sperm and eggs are not human organisms, and zygotes are. Killing innocent humans is murder. That could only be nonsense to someone who is ignorant of simple facts.
@Hatrimn A potential person is not an actual person If A has the potential to become B its logic that A is not B The reason why a zygote at conception is a potential rather than an actual person is because it has none of the organs limbs or other traits recognized of a person It is simply a genetic blueprint, and aborting it is not the same as killing an actual person An acorn is not an oak tree A fetus does not have viability or person hood
@animejerk05 A zygote isn't a "potential person" or a "potential life", that is just jargon used by people who don't know any better.
Which organs specifically connote personhood? Is it the brain? How many neurons and glial cells are required? What measure of voltage fluctuations? Do organ transplants affect personhood?
Limbs are a factor in determining personhood? So amputees are less of a person?
Viability... so people on life support aren't people?
@Hatrimn Fully devolop brain and organs fully devolop human body and able to feel pain. The most important thing being able to survive outside the womb either by real or artifially means. A fetus can do neither. No people that lost a limb arent any less of a person reason why because logically they had the limb in the first place and simply lost it The fetus never had a limb to begin with it was never human to begin with it didnt lose anything to begin with
@animejerk05 The pro-choice talking points you spew are worse than pro-life religious drivel, it's wishywashy fantasy.
LOL, the "brain and organs" do not "fully develop" until well after birth, so that's obviously wrong. And which organs other than the brain? Be specific, there are organs that we can live without... And what about organs that fail and must be replaced? How does that impact personhood? If it doesn't, then organs must not be that significant.
@animejerk05 Being able to survive outside of the womb hinges entirely on technological achievement. Viability has changed in the last 100 years. We will probably be able to fully cultivate and nurture a zygote\fetus outside of a woman's womb sometime relatively soon. This does not, and cannot, determine personhood.
Haha, so if limbs can be lost, yet the subject remains a person, then everything you have mentioned can be lost as well. And what about birth defects that impair limbs?
@Hatrimn If a woman seeks an abortion and you wish to take the fetus and implant it in your body so he can still grow by all means go ahead. In 100 years when we can do that there be no need for abortion cause then a woman seeking one would just donate the fetus to the doctor and he will grow it for her no harm done. people with birth defects still have a majority of its organs a fetus a blue print has 0 and there no way to take care of a fetus without forcing the mother to carry it
@animejerk05 You missed the point. If "surviving outside of the womb" is "the most important thing" in determining personhood, then in the probable future, when we are be able to nurture a zygote entirely without a mother's womb, the zygote will suddenly qualify as a person. However, nothing about the zygote changed, only our technological proficiency.
Since personhood is not contingent on our technological capabilities, viability is a bad argument.
@Hatrimn Your the one thats missing the point Where life starts is debatable at conception half way through the pregency at birth 3 months after birth when the baby has consoionus But thats besides the point Abortions rights is a matter of womens health and reproductive rights You cant force a women to carry a baby againist her will pregnancy does have negative effects on a womans body in certain cases emotional effects on a woman body A woman has the right not to go through all the sicknesses
@animejerk05 You keep making vague appeals to organs, but cannot explain which organs grant personhood, or at what point in their development they grant personhood. It's wishywashy fantasy, some kind of strange reverence for organs without clear explicit protocol.
What difference does the size of a fetus make? Newborns are tiny too; they are small incapable unimpressive specimens, but they are still people.
@Hatrimn related issues with being pregnant such as Nausea vomitting constpipation ect. In the case of a rape victim she has the right not to go through a pregnancy so she wouldnt have to deal with the sever emotional damage of being force to carry her rapist child Two people cant share the same body and have equal rights to each other one will always be suborindinate to the other The government cant force a women to rent out her bodies so another can live
@animejerk05 No, mothers do not have a right to murder their offspring in order to avoid maternal hardships.
Yes, we can force women to carry. That is what a progressive society does. Government regulation of unehtical practices. We limit the autonomy of citizens and businesses to protect the well-being other people all of the time. If you don't approve, then first world countries are not for you.
@Hatrimn maternal hardships is the leading cause of death for women in some countries And the amount of women dying the the US due to maternal hardships has increased in the last few years Abortion isnt considered murder in any civilization in the history of man kind sure some had it illegal but even then it wasnt akin to murder Sure the government has the power to stop companies from selling dangerous goods but the government cant force its citizens to eat healthy cant force them not to
@animejerk05 I already made the provision for mothers who are gravely endangered by a pregnancy. Abortion should be available to them.
Whether or not abortion has ever been considered murder in the past is irrelevant. Tradition and precedence do not dictate what is right.
I agree that prostitution and illegal drugs should be decriminalized. You have a right to fuck up your own body as long as you're not harming someone else in the process.
@Hatrimn smoke or drink when there of adulthood Some first world countries have legalized prostution and even some illegal drugs I guess the right to your body includes the right to sell it in some first world countries Even in america there fighting for prostitution and marawana to be legal In some muslium countries such as Iran women are fighting for their rights and right to an abortion is a key right there fighting for in those countries Iran as legalized forms of abortion and its continuing
@Hatrimn Your the one that has a problem with first world countries The hold that religion has over is citizens will soon be over in all countries No the government does not have the right to force a women to go through a pregnancy
@animejerk05 How am I the one with a problem with first world countries? I am merely holding them to the standard that they initially espoused (principle of equality and communal accountability). You are the one who opposes the protection of a disfranchised group of people (the unborn) for the sake of some distorted view of freedom. Newsflash: if you partake in society, then you aren't free.
@animejerk05 I am not connected to religion in any way, I am an atheist.
Yes, the government does have the right to force a woman to go through pregnancy, in the same way it can force anybody to abstain from actions that would kill a child.
@Hatrimn Past and present my friend and most likely future as well with all the women in order countries fighting for equal rights and abortion rights Its not some distorted view of freedom its the right to the choice of your health Majority of prolifers are against government providing birth control for women There againist pregnant smoking drinking or doing any activities that might cause a miscarriage they want women that have miscarriages in early trimister due to doing strainist activities
@animejerk05 If I lived in 1780, and some hick dipshit told me"slavery has been customary past, present, and will probably be in the future too"... I would laugh in his face.
Fighting for equal rights? LOL, nobody has the right to kill a child, in any way shape or form. Even negligence that results in the death of a child is penalized. Pro-choice women aren't fighting for a right, they are fighting to be absolved of wrongdoing in casting an unborn person to it's death.
@Hatrimn Prolife is not about protecting the fetus its about abortion laws are not about babies, but about controlling women and their decisions about their lives and who they choose to associate with and which activities they want to engage in is all about denying liberty, freedom of association, denial of a woman's body
@animejerk05 Religious pro-lifers may or may not be trying to control women, but that doesn't justify abortion. Pro-life, in and of itself, is about protecting human lives.
@Hatrimn Yea the only difference between abortion and slavery was that slavery was legal first then made illegal Abortion was illegal in America and across the world Then the majority of the world started to believe that it was wrong to force a women to have a child and made it legal Pregnancy is not a minor inconvenience it is one of the painful ordeals in the world its not to be taking lightly people die from it even with all our techology people still die from it you said a women should
@animejerk05 What the majority believes is not a valid argument. The majority of the world are also theistic, but that doesn't give any credence to theism. Neither the majority, nor precedence, dictates what is right or wrong.
Pregnancy is one of the most painful ordeals in the world eh? I know plenty of women who have had children, and I never heard them express their experience that way.
@animejerk05 Do you concede that a recipient of a DONATED organ has rights to the organ, and it cannot be recalled? If so, then a woman who CONSENTS to sex has, in a sense, temporarily donated her body to a fetus in the event of a pregnancy.
The child who received the stolen organ can be killed "humanely", without suffering. Does that make it better? Does the violated man get his organ back then?
@animejerk05 You made a sweeping generalization about pregnancy being one of the most painful ordeals in the world, and that is plainly exaggerated. That isn't to say that it is the same for all women, but don't misrepresent it like that.
I'm pretty sure defending the lives of innocent disadvantaged people (ie children, mentally impaired, the unborn) is in the government's jurisdiction.
@Hatrimn The government can only legally force people to support other people by momentary means only. It can force a father to pay child support but the government cant force him to visit cant force him to stay nearby cant force him to take an intrest the government cant force a women to stop smoking or drinking during pregnancy ect. The government cant force a women to lend out her body even if she had sex Having sex is not a crime the government cant force a punishment for non criminal acts
@animejerk05 You didn't explain why the government forcing us to support others by monetary means is acceptable to you. Are you suggesting that people shouldn't have full rights to their monetary resources - their livelihoods? You must not be an advocate of liberty afterall.
@animejerk05 Prohibiting a mother from expelling an unborn person to die is no more of a punishment for sex than denying an organ doner a recall of their organ is a punishment for their donation. They made the commitment, and they must honor it.
@Hatrimn The government doesnt force people to make monentary contributions
they collect taxes then the government does what ever they want with it Just like people
that are againist war there money still goes to the war effort A woman that has sex doesnt make any commitment to have a child anymore then people who get in a car accident makes a commitment to die we dont tell women you had sex now to must carry children anymore then we tell people oh you should of worn your seat belt if you were
@animejerk05 LOL, collecting taxes and doing whatever with it IS forcing us to make monetary contributions to the "whatever".
A woman who has sex knows the potential consequences (ie getting pregnant), just like an organ doner knows he will be forever lacking that organ. Once it is done, it is irreversible unless the second party consents to it.
Ensuring that life is preserved is not a punishment, and is not akin to denying a car crash victim who didn't wear a seatbelt medical treatment.
@Hatrimn A women should choose to have children and choose to make the sacrifices that child birth entailes The government cant force that on a women even if she has sex and gets pregnant ensuring medical and health rights of women is preserving the overall health of a women A woman can and should be allowed to choose early on during the pregnancy that she doesnt want to go through with child rearing and opt out of it There is absolutly no sin in a early abortion
@animejerk05 Except for the murder part. But no im sure the baby, WHICH IS ALIVE, is perfectly fine with giving its life up so the mother doesnt have to deal with birth then giving it up for adoption.
@jakelaweryson Abortion is not murder never in the history of the world even in anti abortion countries ever has a women that has have an abortion has ever been tried for murder. Abortion isnt considered murder in any country on this planet. You considering abortion to be murder is your personal opinion. Many people and religions believe that life starts at birth not conception. People have many beliefs of when life starts There is no conclusive or proven theory on personhood
@animejerk05 There was also a point in time where black people weren't considered humans. Or Jews. Or women. Or people with disabilities. Or homosexuals. But things changed because of people who had enough courage to stand up for what they believed in. Only time will tell what the possibilities of this movement could be.
@liishadoll Nobody has the right to life by forcing someone else to carry them. If you want to consider fetuses human thats fine but you cannot force another women to carry them to term against her will. Women are not incubators for fetuses
@animejerk05 I don't believe they are incubators either. That wasn't what my message was. I just wonder sometimes if anyone who tries to shoot people who are pro-life down with the reasoning that they will never accomplish anything ever think about my previous comment.
@Hatrimn wearing your seat belt you wouldnt have been in such critical condition can the doctor say
that since you were doing something stupid your no longer intilted
to medical treatment No they must still give the guy surgery yes maybe the women should of crossed her legs maybe she should of worn a condom or used birth control maybe she did use it an it failed
how do you know regardless it doesnt mean that the women is no longer intiled to
@Hatrimn Women that actually had a child made a commitment to have children People that actually donated their organs made a commitment to donate their organs. You got things backwards
@Hatrimn have the right to an abortion if her life was endangered But even that might not save her women should have children when they are ready and willing to accept all the risks illnesses and mental stress of being pregnant Not because the government put a gun at her head Is there an difference from the government forcing a women to give birth to preserve life and the government forcing someone to donate their kidneys to perserve life
@animejerk05 I'll pose the question to you using the analogy more accurately. Should someone be able to recall an organ they donated? How about if it would kill the recipient?
Even if an organ was taken from you without your consent, and put in some innocent child, are you really going to demand it back at the cost of that child's life? And the government should sanction that? Get real.
@animejerk05 That's like saying "no one has the right to life at the expense of another's bankroll", but as tax payers, we sustain the lives of people all of the time. Government implemented institutions like orphanages and sanatoriums force us to keep people alive. Why is that acceptable?
So late term abortion shouldn't be available if the mother wasn't raped? Then it isn't fundamentally about a mother's right to her body, but how much pain the fetus may or may not be subjected to?
@Hatrimn the tax payers only sustain the lives of others by monentary means only the government cant force people to do anything else It is one of the most painful ordeals when speaking of the entire world because in some countries its the leading cause of death for women I didnt misrepresent anything I already mention that more women in the us has been dying due to pregnancy complications defending the rights of women is also in the government jurisdiction and there is no conclusive evidence
@animejerk05 that at the moment of conception a fetus is a human its a theory just like life starting at birth is a theory and life starting at consenus is a theory No its fundamently a womens right I just stated one possible exception that may or may not be debateable Legally speaking a women can get an abortion at any time in this country however if its late term the doctor usually puts the fetus on a machine and allow it to grow without the aid of the woman.
@Hatrimn The fetus is not consious it cannot feel any physical or mental pain
cannot feel any sense of lost But the woman can feel physical and mental pain during the pregnancy and sense of lost of her well being health life style
and the pain of her personal belief ect so her right to her health and well being would surpass the fetus and
she would be allowed to get an abortion any time during early on during
@Hatrimn the egg cell. And it also destroys newly formed zygote cells. Your a complete idiot if you think removing a zygote from a woman body and killing a cancer paitent is the same thing.
@Hatrimn A fetus isnt on the same level like a homosexual a black or another discrimatory group. Personhood at conception is a religious belief, not a provable biological fact like I said
@animejerk05 "A fetus isnt on the same level like a homosexual a black or another discrimatory group."
Spoken like a historically duplicated bigot. "The thing I discriminate against isn't like them other groups that are accepted now, it's really different this time!" LOL
It is more of a religious belief to purport personhood at any other moment in a human being's life other than conception, as it is done using arbitrary and indeterminate parameters.
@Hatrimn Oh you really didn't dispute my statement Do you like random name calling Saying that at the exact moment of conception a fetus deserves full human rights is preposterous two-thirds of all fetuses are spontaneously aborted by nature Its called a miscarriage. My cousin went through 6 of those so far she got pregnant 6 times and she has yet to have even 1 baby A fetus is a potential life it has no soul and no distint human characteristics early on it cant even feel pain
@animejerk05 Newborns don't have "distinct human characteristics" either. They can't do anything that H. sapiens are known to be capable of, yet they are still people. Physical and mental fitness varies, but the principle of equality extends basic rights to all humans.
How is feeling pain significant in determining personhood? Does that mean that people who are numb to pain lose any degree of personhood?... Nope.
@Hatrimn In most miscarriages the fetus is simply lost by the body or the body considers it to be foriegn and kills it. You are actually saying that a single celled zygote that can be lost by the woman at any time deserves full human rights. There is no evidence to support personhood at conception. A doctor can create 1million of your so called zygotes in a lab by taking 1million eggs from 1 woman and combining it with 1million sperm from 1 man. Do they all deserve full human rights in ur book
@animejerk05 You have utterly failed to explain how being susceptible to a premature death disqualifies a H. sapien from being a person.
The evidence for personhood at conception is in the classification of the species. Only bigots try to qualify certain H. sapiens while excluding others.
Yes, synthetically created H. sapiens would deserve the same rights as the rest of us.
@Hatrimn two-thirds of human conceptions are spontaneously aborted by nature. A woman choosing not to go through a pregency before the first trimester of growth is such a crime you should hang her. LOL funny
@animejerk05 Saving the mother from a life threatening pregnancy is the only permissible scenerio for abortion because it can be construed as self-defense, which isn't murder.
LOL, inseparable conjoined twins are considered one person? No, they are considered two people who are conjoined. Way to be a crass douchebag. If you murdered conjoined twins (or more on topic: a pregnant mother), then you would be charged with two counts of murder.
@Hatrimn No it cant be constructed as self defense because you directly said abortion is akin to murder. You said the act of Abortion is murder it cant be murder in some senarios and not in another thats illogical. Either abortion is murder or its not you cant have it both ways. If your claiming the act of abortion is murder then the doctor killing the sick fetus is still murder as the way you describe it.
And by the way they do have thoughts feelings and a personality, thats why they try to get away when getting aborted
RevJhow12 1 day ago
@loathedandabhorred that is the one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. It shows how little and immature you and your opinion really are. My 4 month daughter has the same mannerisms now than when she was in the womb(when seen from the ultrasounds). Do you think that just because you pass through the birth canal you become a human being? No, there is no difference between a baby in the womb and a baby out of the womb, the only thing separating the two is the sac, muscle and skin.
RevJhow12 1 day ago
Ana, you say that everything that makes you human is present in a zygote...are you retarded? Not meaning as an insult, but literally, are you? Go back to school, read up on the topic of abortion and fetal development...Aren't you embarrassed, saying such stupid things? You should be. It is your choice to be a total idiot, but come on, the information is literally at your fingertips. :p
loathedandabhorred 1 day ago
@purplelov114 do you have any kids? Do you not think that while in the womb that baby dosen't have feelings, thoughts or even a personality already because they do! They already have a heart beat! Think about it.
RevJhow12 2 days ago
@RevJhow12 Of course a fetus doesn't have thoughts feelings or personality, come on dude, get a bloody grip. An earthworm has a heartbeat, are you going to argue that it is equal to human life? A fetus is not developed as a human being, it is simply human potential. Try considering the rights of babies to be wanted, loved, valued rather than your own overemotional ridiculous little opinion. Women are capable of judging for themselves whether their own pregnancy is a blessing or a curse.
loathedandabhorred 1 day ago
ABORTION IS NOT COMPARABLE TO KILLING A NEWBORN. Newborns have taken there first breathes. Prior to being born, a newborn is part of its mother and so therefore it is its mother's choice if she wishes to abort. Abortion does not allow for a newborn to be killed. abortion is also not comparable to killing a 40-year old for much more obvious reasons. A forty-year old is its own person with thoughts, feeling and emotion. It's mother certainly can't kill it! This women's argument is invalid.
purplelov114 5 days ago
Who cares about abortion it's a fetus that looks like an alien.
DerekD7777 6 days ago
lets see you get raped and then tell us that you think women shouldn't have a choice.
AbbyRoseMark 1 week ago
The woman in the video also considers a fetus as "life" as a human being and abortion as killing but men would be killers each day and women each month because of sperm/ovum as DNA which is also mixed already. Without the development of a brain it is still relativly big DNA at some point but for certain reasons no "life" to me and that's not cruel at all. How can no pain be cruel?
Sushi387 1 week ago
I think when the brain is not developed already abortion is okay because it causes no pain. Giving birth would cause pain for both in many ways. Is the biological process better at making a decision over a life which already exists than a brain? I don't like some of the pro-life activists because some try to manipulate with simply wrong "knowledge". Adoption is no argument because the planet already "offers" children who need parents. The "would be" is not logical, no "is", but just thought.
Sushi387 1 week ago
Here is the slippery slope about abortion. If you say that the person isn't fully developed, a person does not stop developing throughout his or her life up until physical death and then everything breaks down. This by default makes murder against a person outside of the womb no longer a crime, but if you claim it is wrong to murder, then you have a double standard.
davegooley 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
-Pro-Lifers-
[ ] retard [ ] douchebag [ ] christian [ ] troll
which one are you?
I bet every one of you sick bastards eat God's animals that were slaughtered for your sadistic pleasures
muffinsareemocupcake 1 week ago
All of these arguments depends on a purely physical definition of a human being. Sure, the species Homo Sapien is defined by a typical genetic code and certain physiological traits, but that isn't what makes us "human". Fetuses may be genetically human, but they lack the trait that makes us essentially "human".
P.S. @LiveActionFilms, If you are honestly looking for good reasons to abandon the pro-life camp, then message me. I promise to better acquaint you with a strong pro-choice position.
AlexanderDGraham 1 week ago
@AlexanderDGraham a baby is a baby even at conception and abortion is murder no matter how you candy coat it its wrong and there is nothing you can say to make it right
BossLikesShenanigans 1 week ago
@BossLikesShenanigans So, the essential qualities that makes a baby a baby are present at the moment of conception?
AlexanderDGraham 1 week ago
@AlexanderDGraham yes it is a gift from God like every other baby is
BossLikesShenanigans 1 week ago
@BossLikesShenanigans So, what is this essential quality? You must know what this quality is, since you know what things have this quality.
AlexanderDGraham 1 week ago
@AlexanderDGraham that is an essential quality and anther one is it has cells
BossLikesShenanigans 1 week ago
@BossLikesShenanigans I know that it is an essential quality. I want to know what this essential quality is. What distinguishes this quality from other qualities, such as redness or roughness. Also, being composed of cells cannot be the essential quality that makes a human a human. All animals have cells, but only one animal is human.
AlexanderDGraham 6 days ago
Not so sure she would be saying that if she got raped and got pregnant. But hey atleast she lets us guys of the hook, cause 99,9% of the men in world are mass murderer with that reasoning.
Bacbi 2 weeks ago
I'm pro choice. Let people decide what the fuck they want to do.
BadCynic 2 weeks ago
@BadCynic Why not let murderers and Rapists decide what the fuck they want to do? The point is abortion violates human rights.
david52875 2 weeks ago
@david52875
Are these rapists and murderers still raping and murdering? I don't know enough to answer your question. How does abortion violate human rights?
BadCynic 2 weeks ago
@BadCynic It violates human rights by extinguishing a human life without the consent of that human. As a civilized society, we should not permit "letting people decide what the fuck they want to do" when what they want to do is tantamount to murder.
Hatrimn 2 weeks ago
@Hatrimn
Well that's the thing. The early forms are not human. They do, however hold the potential to become a human. Later stages shouldn't even be considered. However, early stages not only lack a brain, but they also feed simply by absorbing nutrients. They can't see, they can't feel, they merely exist. Like the shit I wipe off my ass. Besides, we can justify killing all other forms of life for one reason or other. Do you like chicken? How about bacon? I like bacon.
BadCynic 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hatrimn
Well that's the thing. The early forms are not human. They do, however hold the potential to become a human. Later stages shouldn't even be considered. However, early stages not only lack a brain, but they also feed simply by absorbing nutrients. They can't see, they can't feel, they merely exist. Like the shit I wipe off my ass. Besides, we can justify killing all other forms of life for one reason or other. Do you like chicken? How about bacon? I like bacon.
BadCynic 2 weeks ago
@BadCynic Yes, there certainly are still rapists and murderers raping and murdering today. Abortion violates human rights because the fetus has a right to life.
david52875 2 weeks ago
@david52875
Would you defend the bacteria I wash off my hands? This should be a matter of choice because people are incapable of coming to a consensus, and as long as no humans are harmed then I see no problems here. Only the self righteous, too lazy to do any research.
BadCynic 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Interested in social action or social issues? Check out my channel at riverlife695 today!
riverlife695 2 weeks ago
I think its only justifiable if the child is going to die within a few days of birth and will suffer in those days or some circumstance in which its life will definitely bring more pain than good but in general cases, trivial reasons should not be used to justify abortion.
I think we should focus on getting the message out stopping people having sex without protection if they don't even want to have children, if we overcome that, the problem is almost resolved.
AntiSpeciesistWorld 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
she did asker da rape qustion ???
and what about the 12 year old little girl who get s raped and because of that she gets pregnant
so ya Pro-Life assholes are say she should have the kid because abortion is bad
she is still a kid have would u tell that girl that her life is over
MADNEES1 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
MADNEES1 2 weeks ago
Ana always has great points !!!!
esaflygiirl123 3 weeks ago
she is very updated and educated about her view.. i respect her for her opinion
MrFranklin87alvarez 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Im already fighting for human rights im pro choice. No human being has the right to remain inside the body of another human being against that person's will. There is no right to be born.
Spermatozoa, zygotes, embroyos and fetuses do not have rights that supercede those of the woman carrying them. The government forcing a women or a little girl to be pregnant for 9 months and bear a child against their will that is slavery that is wrong.
animejerk05 3 weeks ago
FUCK YOURSELF.
stanzipotenza 4 weeks ago
THEY ARENT HUMANS UNTIL THEY STOP LOOKING LIKE RETARDED ALIENS.
i forced my wife to have an abortion becu..she was hispanic..and i dont want a beaner baby
MrExclusive2274 1 month ago
@MrsTaySwiftFan13 threatening, the availability of legal abortion has helped avert serious medical complications that could have resulted from childbirth. Before legal abortion, such women's choices were limited to dangerous illegal abortion or dangerous childbirth Outlaw abortion, and more children will bear children a 12 year old kid 14 15 should not be a mother forcing a child to give birth to another child is child abuse
animejerk05 1 month ago
@MrsTaySwiftFan13 A fetus is not a baby or a child just for the record its a genetic blueprint a child is defined as a fully develop entity that has been born and has independent body functions why would a women choose an abortion there are a lot of reasons Legal abortions protect womens health Legal abortion not only protects women lives it also protects their health For tens of thousands of women with heart disease kidney disease and other illnesses that can be life
animejerk05 1 month ago
@animejerk05 Huh, a genetic blueprint is DNA, not a fetus. Also, you're as likely to die from abortions as you are 'being' pregnant. You're literally ripping out a piece of your body, unnaturally, which also causes scarring. Enough abortions can cause infertility, barring you from ever having children.
JessesanMan 3 weeks ago
@JessesanMan No your not. From safe abortions you will not die from it most abortions takes place within the first 2 trimesters 95%. It will not cause inferility and it will not bare you from furure children. Only late term unsafe abortions cause death and major damage. And most women get unsafe abortion because of anti abortions laws making it hard difficult and or impossible to get an safe early term 1.
animejerk05 3 weeks ago
I bet the girl in the vid has no problem with deathrow. Hmm they in the way. But they people.
timo86m 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm undecided about abortion.
On one hand I support it as it is killing children.
On the other hand, it gives women a choice.
ASDFsdg1000 1 month ago
this chick is the definition of smh
ismelljello 2 months ago
OH and you can kill people at any point in time. It is arbitrary as long as the laws support it. You can kill a man trying to take food so he doesnt starve to death. The fact that its legal doesnt make it any less arbitrary. I could use the argument that "well shouldnt we not kill that man and help him because hes just hungry" :_) A woman might abort a fetus for doing the same to her. Its "stealing" food from her body, against her will.
This woman is using purely self-serving arguments.
vidfreak56 2 months ago
ROFL so if the "brightest and the best" cant defend their arguments that means their arguments arent trustworthy? Isnt that true of anyone? All pro-lifers should be ready to apply that argument to themselves.
vidfreak56 2 months ago
Every trait a human has a zygote has? Pure myth. An engine is not a car, so a fetus is not a person. Human being? Depends on ur definition. Whatever you want to say the notion of pro or anti abortion has to do with personal choice and not some objective "right" and "wrong". We can talk about objective relative morality in general, but hardly in a way to apply a simple wrong or right to one side or the other.
vidfreak56 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When you subscribe to situational ethics the righteousness of everything, from boiling babies to poisoning children with mercury to cluster-bombing clinics to irradiating tumors and commuters, is relative. The worms, by now, have finished with Carl Sagan as he's up to his pits in arms—face-down in a piny box...
ThePregnancySlaves 2 months ago
@Wahanamo2345
princeton.edu/~prolife/academic.html
Read this, I rest my case here.
TheYvdW 3 months ago
Even science says that life begins at fertilization (also known as conception). So than it should be murder right? But for most people who defend abortion it still isn't murder, this proves that this is a morallity question rather than a scientific question. Thus, as this is so controversial, we should rather be safe than sorry.
Even Dr. Landrum Shettles and many other professors say life begins at concpetion. Look for it. Bye!
TheYvdW 3 months ago
Comment removed
TheYvdW 3 months ago
Comment removed
TheYvdW 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
["This is the scientific reality that the seeds of all common fruits (except citrus) contain vitamin B17, an anti-cancer vitamin. If we ingest proper quantities of these vitamins, either in the pure form or through ingesting the nitrilosidic foods, we will be able to prevent cancer just as surely as we are able to prevent scurvy by the use of vitamin C or pernicious anemia by the use of vitamin B12." — Ernest Krebs, Jr.]
ThePregnancySlaves 3 months ago
Miss Ana Benderas is a decent, caring person.
ThePregnancySlaves 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
[Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"; Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it." — "60 Minutes" (5/12/96)]
ThePregnancySlaves 3 months ago
50 million and counting. MURDER!! PERIOD!
mustangpassurchevy 3 months ago
So according to you, it would be better for a baby to be born in a situation where the mother got knocked up by a dead beat alcoholic who abuses her and will end up abusing the child rather then just aborting it when the brain waves and nerve endings of the so called "baby" aren't even developed enough to feel no pain. That's really humane of you.
luv2scream815 3 months ago
@luv2scream815 Yea, let's kill babies because their fathers are assholes! Brilliant idea. It's not like we could possibly develope and stregnthen domestic abuse recognition\intervention proficiency and instill a sense of communal responsibility to get involved.
People who can't feel pain are shit, I agree! So what if it's temporary? We should be able to kill people who are anesthetized or unconscious too. Life is hard so let's just end their suffering before they regain their senses.
Hatrimn 3 months ago
@Hatrimn It's not a baby its a fetus. Their is a gigantic difference and if you paid attention in sophomore year biology instead of burning Steven Hawking books and holding up signs that say "God hates fags" outside your church you would probably understand that.
luv2scream815 3 months ago
@luv2scream815 LOL yea you have to be religious to understand what a human being is, and that killing it is wrong.
There is also a gigantic difference between a baby and an adult, so what? A fetus is an individual specimen belonging to the H. sapien species, aka a person. I guess your biology class didn't cover that?
Hatrimn 3 months ago
@Hatrimn So to you if you got a sonogram done and saw that the fetus was missing all its limbs you would still have it? I dont think so. A fetus is not a human. Just because it has a heart beat dosent make it human. Primates, insects, every living thing has a heart beat.
luv2scream815 3 months ago
@luv2scream815 Wow, way to insult all living amputees. Of course I would still have it, I'm not a murderous cretin and I don't foolishly believe that limbs are the key to a happy fulfilling life.
A fetus is not a human, but a newborn is? Is this based on brain development? Exactly how many neurons and glial cells are required in order to be deemed a human?
Hatrimn 3 months ago
@Hatrimn Generally, if the human has nothing wrong with him mentally or physically, it starts off with either two xx chromosomes, which would make it a girl, and two xy cells. Once being fully developed it will have 46 cells.
luv2scream815 3 months ago
@Hatrimn When a fetus is first conceived it either receives an x or y chromosome. If it has XY chromosomes it comes out a boy, if it has two Y chromosomes it comes out a girl. When a baby is fully developed it will have 46 chromosomes.
luv2scream815 3 months ago
@luv2scream815 Alright, well, the first diploid cell (zygote) contains all 46 chromosomes. LOL
Hatrimn 3 months ago
@Hatrimn A fetus dosent have 46 chromosomes if its being aborted
luv2scream815 3 months ago
@luv2scream815 What the hell are you blabbering about? A fetus does have 46 chromosomes. Someone must have lied to you and said only fetuses that don't have 46 chromosomes are aborted?
Hatrimn 3 months ago
@Hatrimn A fully developed one maybe, but not within the first 6 weeks lol
luv2scream815 3 months ago
@luv2scream815 The first zygote cell has all 46 chromosomes. Look it up and stop being wrong.
Hatrimn 3 months ago
@Hatrimn Lets say it does have 46 chromosomes. That still dosent make a fetus a human being. Alot of special needs children have 45 or 47 chromosomes. Are they not human? A fetus isnt developed enough to be called a person, and by taking the right to abort away is taking the right of choice away.
luv2scream815 3 months ago
@luv2scream815 Again, why is a newborn considered human but a fetus isn't? You brought up 46 chromosomes and XY sex determination and that failed miserably.
Abortion is murder until reasonably shown otherwise, and so to take the "right to abort" away does not hinder the "right of choice" anymore than taking the "right to rape" or the "right to steal" away does.
Hatrimn 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hatrimn I can say the same thing to you. Prove to me that a fetus is a human.
luv2scream815 3 months ago
I don't think people should get abortions. You know there's this thing called putting your kid up for adoption.
AK107DX 3 months ago
there should not be a law regarding abortion. we dont create laws because of morality, but because if we didnt society would be full of chaos. people should be able to do whatever they want.
toSTONEiGO 3 months ago
@toSTONEiGO Why do we have laws against killing newborns? How is the chaos caused or not caused by that different than killing the child right before birth or while half born?
LiveActionFilms 3 months ago
@LiveActionFilms The idea that killing newborns is wrong is so old that nobody, including me, questions it. Therefore, it is only natural that there is a law against it. Perhaps if killing newborns was an ancient practice used until today, there would be moral debate on it too. Perhaps it would be legal. Since abortion has just as many people on one side as the other, and I believe it is wrong to impose your own morals on someone else, people should be able to choose their own beliefs.
toSTONEiGO 3 months ago
@toSTONEiGO You are avoiding directly answer the question. Do you not have an argument?
A law against abortion wouldn't purely be out of morality but be to protect human life...the same reason we don't kill newborn babies.
LiveActionFilms 3 months ago
@LiveActionFilms It actually is a matter of an idea of correct morality. According to you, a human life requires protection once the fetus is conceived, and according to me, protecting life is required once the baby is able to be born. Using neither factual nor emotional arguments can change someone's opinion on the matter.
toSTONEiGO 3 months ago
@LiveActionFilms Personhood at conception is a religious belief, not a provable biological fact Judaism holds that it begins at birth and abortion is not murder The religious community will never reach consensus on the definition of a “person” or when abortion is morally justified. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF WHATS SO EVER THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION ITS ONLY A THEORY. some people beleive life starts when you can feel pain. Some believe that life starts when you have a brain.
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 "THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF WHATS SO EVER THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION"
It is a scientific fact. Go look at any college level textbook. We love science.
And personhood is not a scientific concept but a legal one. Science had no opinion on when personhood starts. Science can tell you want is but it cannot tell you what laws should be.
Since you seem to disagree with mainstream science, when do you think life beings from a scientific standpoint?
LiveActionFilms 2 months ago
@LiveActionFilms I said personhood very different from being Human in Dna terms. Of course a fetus have the Dna of a human eye color ect. But just note that human hair have all those things as well. Either way i was simply stated that a fetus is physical dependent to the mother for survival before viability Since its not a independent existance it cannot have equal rights to the mother.
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 A newborn human does not have independent existence as it dies without the care of other humans. Does a newborn not have human rights?
When do human rights begin?
LiveActionFilms 2 months ago
@LiveActionFilms A new born does have independent existance Being physically dependent on someone and being Socially dependent on someone are two different things A fetus is actually physically attached to a mother and dependent on her body for life support so it cant be a independent existance A new born is not physically attached to anyone Of course its Socially dependent on Society to take care of it but the difference is that it is not an physical attachment
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 "A fetus is actually physically attached to a mother and dependent on her body..."
LOL, so conjoined twins who share vital organs cannot have equal rights either eh? Their physiological dependence must mean they aren't people. Brilliant.
And why is social dependence an exception to your rule? How is being dependent on a mother all that different from being dependent on an incubator or any other life support in determining personhood?
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn alright most conjoined twins are seperated immidiantly after birth. And being dependent on a incubator is very different from being physically dependent on the mother. for one your not infriging on anyone rights while your on the respirator. But while your physically dependent you may be infriging on her rights. You dont know the situation of every woman you dont know why she wants an abortion Forcing a woman to carry a a child she doesnt want is infrigment of her civil liberties
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 You didn't address the point of my rebuttal. Are conjoined twins who share vital organs people or aren't they?
So if you infringe on someone else's rights, even if involuntarily (like a fetus), then you aren't a person? Is that what you're suggesting? Does that mean I would be justified in killing all petty thieves?
How does not knowing a murderer's motive excuse their murder? And since when do civil liberties include murder?
Hatrimn 2 months ago
Comment removed
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 werent born together. Since the mother came first she has domain over the body
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 I have domain over my house, but if a child was inside of it, then I would be accountable if that child were harmed due to my actions or negligence. And do you not realize that what you just said there gives mothers free rein to consume alcohol and other toxins despite it having adverse on the child post parturition? You are condoning child abuse, along with murder, based on a poorly conceived notion of liberty.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn 2 completly different things here an example if there a child in the house and you want to smoke or consume alcohol then you can drive away and smoke outside or consume alchol somewere else and the child wont be harmed you dont have to give up smoking and you can move the child from your house give him to your grandma then do what ever u want in the house But while your pregnet everything you do directly affects the fetus are you saying that woman who drink or smoke while pregnet
animejerk05 2 months ago
@Hatrimn should be thrown in jail is that what your saying.
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 A variance in inconvenience does not make them two completely different things. Neither situations are permanent. Bother hypothetical mothers must refrain from doing anything to harm the child, the pregnant mother just has to be more consistent for the duration of the responsibility.
The punishment should fit the severity of the crime, like any other case of child abuse.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn If the first mother doesnt want to give up smoking drinking or any other risky behavior she enjoys no matter what she always have the right to reliquish the responsibilities of being the caregiver then she can continue her lifestyle as she pleases The 2nd potental mother is absolutley forced to have the responsiblities because the fetus is attached to her the first mother has options the 2nd does not The 2nd mother cannot give up the responsiblities and pass it on to another.
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 Just because the first mother's options are more immediate, that doesn't mean the second mother is without options. Her situation is not permanent.
Do you even realize you're arguing for extinguishing an innocent human life for the sake of convenience?
"Boohoo, I don't have options, I'm stuck with this kid for 9 months, unless of course I kill it!" Brilliant...
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn There is no scientific consensus as to when human life begins. It is a matter of philosophic opinion or religious belief. Human life is a continuum sperm and eggs are also alive, and represent potential human beings but virtually all sperm and eggs are wasted. Also two-thirds of human conceptions are spontaneously aborted by nature Many religions such as Judaism holds that life begins at birth and abortion is not murder Personhood at conception is a religious belief not a provable fact
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 Yes there is a consensus as to when a human life begins, it is when an organism that can be classified H. sapien is created (aka conception). The only debate to speak of pertains to personhood (the principle of equality), and discourse has always been distorted by those who wish to withhold personhood from another group of people (ie minorities, homosexuals, the disabled, fetuses, etc). Their arguments are fallacious, discriminatory, and have an ever decreasing shelf life.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Oh a discriminatory group two-thirds of your discriminatory group are spontaneously aborted by nature Its called a miscarriage. My cousin went through 6 of those so far she got pregnant 6 times and she has yet to have even 1 baby. Btw she wants 1. A women who doesnt want to be a mother who chooses to have an abortion within the 1st few trimisters isnt doing any thing wrong. No matter what way you slice a potental life doesnt have any rights there called potental life for a reason.
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 LOL so because a group is greatly susceptible to dieing off naturally, they lose consideration for personhood? "Sorry cancer patients, your condition renders your personhood questionable. Why? Because you're probably gonna die anyways silly!"
It's called a "potential life" because it hasn't developed the common traits that the species is known to possess. Newborns are "potential lives" too.... again, what is your point?
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn If you consider a zygote and full human being then stem celled research would also have to stop because doctors use donated sperm and woman egg cells and combine them in a lab all the time. Never mind that this research as the potental to save thousands of lives and cure major illnesses. But hey all zygotes are full human beings so a man and woman cant donate sperm and egg cells in the name of medicine also birth control would also have to stop because they destroy sperm cells before
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 LOL, for one thing, stem cell research is not limited to plundering embryonic and fetal stem cells. Secondly, no research warrants the murder of innocent people.
Gametes are not humans, they are reproductive cells, therefore contraception that only affects gametes is not immoral. If a zygote is intentionally destroyed, then it is tantamount to murder.
You're a complete idiot if you don't see how murdering ANYONE is wrong.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Your on crack if you think that destroying a zygote is akin to murder. Women and men have millions of sperm and egg cells. Really if a woman or a man donated a couple cells in order to produce medicine that might be able to cure terminally ill paitents or people in severe pain you would be againist it. every month a woman loses an egg during her cycle. And when a man masterbates thousands of sperm cells are wasted. But using a few in the name of science is immoral BULLSHIT
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 I just told you that gametes are not humans, thus killing them is not murder, so your ramblings about sperm and eggs is useless.
Zygotes on the other hand are humans. You can try to downplay the value of zygotes all you want, and I could do the same with newborns using the same poor reasoning, but it doesn't change what they are.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Quit your bullshit. So basically I can do what ever I want with my sperm a woman anything she wants with her egg. But if me and my girlfriend decides to combine them for even one second then we throw it away we commited an act of murder What kind of nonsense bullshit is that You prolifers are full of crap
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 Sperm and eggs are not human organisms, and zygotes are. Killing innocent humans is murder. That could only be nonsense to someone who is ignorant of simple facts.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn A potential person is not an actual person If A has the potential to become B its logic that A is not B The reason why a zygote at conception is a potential rather than an actual person is because it has none of the organs limbs or other traits recognized of a person It is simply a genetic blueprint, and aborting it is not the same as killing an actual person An acorn is not an oak tree A fetus does not have viability or person hood
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 A zygote isn't a "potential person" or a "potential life", that is just jargon used by people who don't know any better.
Which organs specifically connote personhood? Is it the brain? How many neurons and glial cells are required? What measure of voltage fluctuations? Do organ transplants affect personhood?
Limbs are a factor in determining personhood? So amputees are less of a person?
Viability... so people on life support aren't people?
Keep trying.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Fully devolop brain and organs fully devolop human body and able to feel pain. The most important thing being able to survive outside the womb either by real or artifially means. A fetus can do neither. No people that lost a limb arent any less of a person reason why because logically they had the limb in the first place and simply lost it The fetus never had a limb to begin with it was never human to begin with it didnt lose anything to begin with
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 The pro-choice talking points you spew are worse than pro-life religious drivel, it's wishywashy fantasy.
LOL, the "brain and organs" do not "fully develop" until well after birth, so that's obviously wrong. And which organs other than the brain? Be specific, there are organs that we can live without... And what about organs that fail and must be replaced? How does that impact personhood? If it doesn't, then organs must not be that significant.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@animejerk05 Being able to survive outside of the womb hinges entirely on technological achievement. Viability has changed in the last 100 years. We will probably be able to fully cultivate and nurture a zygote\fetus outside of a woman's womb sometime relatively soon. This does not, and cannot, determine personhood.
Haha, so if limbs can be lost, yet the subject remains a person, then everything you have mentioned can be lost as well. And what about birth defects that impair limbs?
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn If a woman seeks an abortion and you wish to take the fetus and implant it in your body so he can still grow by all means go ahead. In 100 years when we can do that there be no need for abortion cause then a woman seeking one would just donate the fetus to the doctor and he will grow it for her no harm done. people with birth defects still have a majority of its organs a fetus a blue print has 0 and there no way to take care of a fetus without forcing the mother to carry it
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 You missed the point. If "surviving outside of the womb" is "the most important thing" in determining personhood, then in the probable future, when we are be able to nurture a zygote entirely without a mother's womb, the zygote will suddenly qualify as a person. However, nothing about the zygote changed, only our technological proficiency.
Since personhood is not contingent on our technological capabilities, viability is a bad argument.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Your the one thats missing the point Where life starts is debatable at conception half way through the pregency at birth 3 months after birth when the baby has consoionus But thats besides the point Abortions rights is a matter of womens health and reproductive rights You cant force a women to carry a baby againist her will pregnancy does have negative effects on a womans body in certain cases emotional effects on a woman body A woman has the right not to go through all the sicknesses
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 You keep making vague appeals to organs, but cannot explain which organs grant personhood, or at what point in their development they grant personhood. It's wishywashy fantasy, some kind of strange reverence for organs without clear explicit protocol.
What difference does the size of a fetus make? Newborns are tiny too; they are small incapable unimpressive specimens, but they are still people.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn related issues with being pregnant such as Nausea vomitting constpipation ect. In the case of a rape victim she has the right not to go through a pregnancy so she wouldnt have to deal with the sever emotional damage of being force to carry her rapist child Two people cant share the same body and have equal rights to each other one will always be suborindinate to the other The government cant force a women to rent out her bodies so another can live
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 No, mothers do not have a right to murder their offspring in order to avoid maternal hardships.
Yes, we can force women to carry. That is what a progressive society does. Government regulation of unehtical practices. We limit the autonomy of citizens and businesses to protect the well-being other people all of the time. If you don't approve, then first world countries are not for you.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn maternal hardships is the leading cause of death for women in some countries And the amount of women dying the the US due to maternal hardships has increased in the last few years Abortion isnt considered murder in any civilization in the history of man kind sure some had it illegal but even then it wasnt akin to murder Sure the government has the power to stop companies from selling dangerous goods but the government cant force its citizens to eat healthy cant force them not to
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 I already made the provision for mothers who are gravely endangered by a pregnancy. Abortion should be available to them.
Whether or not abortion has ever been considered murder in the past is irrelevant. Tradition and precedence do not dictate what is right.
I agree that prostitution and illegal drugs should be decriminalized. You have a right to fuck up your own body as long as you're not harming someone else in the process.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn smoke or drink when there of adulthood Some first world countries have legalized prostution and even some illegal drugs I guess the right to your body includes the right to sell it in some first world countries Even in america there fighting for prostitution and marawana to be legal In some muslium countries such as Iran women are fighting for their rights and right to an abortion is a key right there fighting for in those countries Iran as legalized forms of abortion and its continuing
animejerk05 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Your the one that has a problem with first world countries The hold that religion has over is citizens will soon be over in all countries No the government does not have the right to force a women to go through a pregnancy
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 How am I the one with a problem with first world countries? I am merely holding them to the standard that they initially espoused (principle of equality and communal accountability). You are the one who opposes the protection of a disfranchised group of people (the unborn) for the sake of some distorted view of freedom. Newsflash: if you partake in society, then you aren't free.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@animejerk05 I am not connected to religion in any way, I am an atheist.
Yes, the government does have the right to force a woman to go through pregnancy, in the same way it can force anybody to abstain from actions that would kill a child.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Past and present my friend and most likely future as well with all the women in order countries fighting for equal rights and abortion rights Its not some distorted view of freedom its the right to the choice of your health Majority of prolifers are against government providing birth control for women There againist pregnant smoking drinking or doing any activities that might cause a miscarriage they want women that have miscarriages in early trimister due to doing strainist activities
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 If I lived in 1780, and some hick dipshit told me"slavery has been customary past, present, and will probably be in the future too"... I would laugh in his face.
Fighting for equal rights? LOL, nobody has the right to kill a child, in any way shape or form. Even negligence that results in the death of a child is penalized. Pro-choice women aren't fighting for a right, they are fighting to be absolved of wrongdoing in casting an unborn person to it's death.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Prolife is not about protecting the fetus its about abortion laws are not about babies, but about controlling women and their decisions about their lives and who they choose to associate with and which activities they want to engage in is all about denying liberty, freedom of association, denial of a woman's body
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 Religious pro-lifers may or may not be trying to control women, but that doesn't justify abortion. Pro-life, in and of itself, is about protecting human lives.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Yea the only difference between abortion and slavery was that slavery was legal first then made illegal Abortion was illegal in America and across the world Then the majority of the world started to believe that it was wrong to force a women to have a child and made it legal Pregnancy is not a minor inconvenience it is one of the painful ordeals in the world its not to be taking lightly people die from it even with all our techology people still die from it you said a women should
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 What the majority believes is not a valid argument. The majority of the world are also theistic, but that doesn't give any credence to theism. Neither the majority, nor precedence, dictates what is right or wrong.
Pregnancy is one of the most painful ordeals in the world eh? I know plenty of women who have had children, and I never heard them express their experience that way.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn No the child does not have the right to the stolen organ
If the doctor was about to put the organ into the child then
he got a message saying that it was stolen property then he couldnt
give it to him however if the child already had the stolen organ
and the man wanted it back then even though the child techiocally
doesnt have any rights or claims to the organ he would be allow to
keep it because the child being a full consious breathing human being
would feel physical pain in dying
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 Do you concede that a recipient of a DONATED organ has rights to the organ, and it cannot be recalled? If so, then a woman who CONSENTS to sex has, in a sense, temporarily donated her body to a fetus in the event of a pregnancy.
The child who received the stolen organ can be killed "humanely", without suffering. Does that make it better? Does the violated man get his organ back then?
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Im preety sure you know plenty of women that never express their feelings in
that way thats because the majority of women do in fact choose to continue the
pregnancy thats a fact They wanted a child and there willingly to make sacrifices
for it thats why they dont feel that way However im also sure you dont know
the circumstances or personally know any women that was raped In sure you dont
know any under age pregnant girls at age 12 or age 14 ect and their circumstances
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 You made a sweeping generalization about pregnancy being one of the most painful ordeals in the world, and that is plainly exaggerated. That isn't to say that it is the same for all women, but don't misrepresent it like that.
I'm pretty sure defending the lives of innocent disadvantaged people (ie children, mentally impaired, the unborn) is in the government's jurisdiction.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn The government can only legally force people to support other people by momentary means only. It can force a father to pay child support but the government cant force him to visit cant force him to stay nearby cant force him to take an intrest the government cant force a women to stop smoking or drinking during pregnancy ect. The government cant force a women to lend out her body even if she had sex Having sex is not a crime the government cant force a punishment for non criminal acts
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 You didn't explain why the government forcing us to support others by monetary means is acceptable to you. Are you suggesting that people shouldn't have full rights to their monetary resources - their livelihoods? You must not be an advocate of liberty afterall.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@animejerk05 Prohibiting a mother from expelling an unborn person to die is no more of a punishment for sex than denying an organ doner a recall of their organ is a punishment for their donation. They made the commitment, and they must honor it.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn The government doesnt force people to make monentary contributions
they collect taxes then the government does what ever they want with it Just like people
that are againist war there money still goes to the war effort A woman that has sex doesnt make any commitment to have a child anymore then people who get in a car accident makes a commitment to die we dont tell women you had sex now to must carry children anymore then we tell people oh you should of worn your seat belt if you were
animejerk05 1 month ago
@animejerk05 LOL, collecting taxes and doing whatever with it IS forcing us to make monetary contributions to the "whatever".
A woman who has sex knows the potential consequences (ie getting pregnant), just like an organ doner knows he will be forever lacking that organ. Once it is done, it is irreversible unless the second party consents to it.
Ensuring that life is preserved is not a punishment, and is not akin to denying a car crash victim who didn't wear a seatbelt medical treatment.
Hatrimn 1 month ago
@Hatrimn A women should choose to have children and choose to make the sacrifices that child birth entailes The government cant force that on a women even if she has sex and gets pregnant ensuring medical and health rights of women is preserving the overall health of a women A woman can and should be allowed to choose early on during the pregnancy that she doesnt want to go through with child rearing and opt out of it There is absolutly no sin in a early abortion
animejerk05 1 month ago
@animejerk05 Except for the murder part. But no im sure the baby, WHICH IS ALIVE, is perfectly fine with giving its life up so the mother doesnt have to deal with birth then giving it up for adoption.
jakelaweryson 1 month ago
@jakelaweryson Abortion is not murder never in the history of the world even in anti abortion countries ever has a women that has have an abortion has ever been tried for murder. Abortion isnt considered murder in any country on this planet. You considering abortion to be murder is your personal opinion. Many people and religions believe that life starts at birth not conception. People have many beliefs of when life starts There is no conclusive or proven theory on personhood
animejerk05 1 month ago
@animejerk05 There was also a point in time where black people weren't considered humans. Or Jews. Or women. Or people with disabilities. Or homosexuals. But things changed because of people who had enough courage to stand up for what they believed in. Only time will tell what the possibilities of this movement could be.
liishadoll 1 week ago
@liishadoll Nobody has the right to life by forcing someone else to carry them. If you want to consider fetuses human thats fine but you cannot force another women to carry them to term against her will. Women are not incubators for fetuses
animejerk05 1 week ago
@animejerk05 I don't believe they are incubators either. That wasn't what my message was. I just wonder sometimes if anyone who tries to shoot people who are pro-life down with the reasoning that they will never accomplish anything ever think about my previous comment.
liishadoll 1 week ago
@Hatrimn wearing your seat belt you wouldnt have been in such critical condition can the doctor say
that since you were doing something stupid your no longer intilted
to medical treatment No they must still give the guy surgery yes maybe the women should of crossed her legs maybe she should of worn a condom or used birth control maybe she did use it an it failed
how do you know regardless it doesnt mean that the women is no longer intiled to
make choices about her health
animejerk05 1 month ago
@Hatrimn Women that actually had a child made a commitment to have children People that actually donated their organs made a commitment to donate their organs. You got things backwards
animejerk05 1 month ago
@Hatrimn Im sure you dont know any women that absolutley do not want any children or
you dont know of any women that was a screwed up reproductive system and the
doctor told her early on in the pregnacy that if you choose to try and have
this child their a good chance you could die or face complications and if you
want a safe abortion knows your chance ect ect ect Im protecting the rights of the minority
Im not advocating go out and abort you baby no im telling women to carefully
animejerk05 2 months ago
@Hatrimn consider all their options and choose the one thats right for them and their
circumstances a trained doctor and the women should make these decisions not the government
animejerk05 2 months ago
@Hatrimn have the right to an abortion if her life was endangered But even that might not save her women should have children when they are ready and willing to accept all the risks illnesses and mental stress of being pregnant Not because the government put a gun at her head Is there an difference from the government forcing a women to give birth to preserve life and the government forcing someone to donate their kidneys to perserve life
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 I'll pose the question to you using the analogy more accurately. Should someone be able to recall an organ they donated? How about if it would kill the recipient?
Even if an organ was taken from you without your consent, and put in some innocent child, are you really going to demand it back at the cost of that child's life? And the government should sanction that? Get real.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn dying due to having the organ remove he
would feel emotional pain knowing he was about to die and that would
out way the pain the other person who had the organ stolen would feel
In another note the fetus does not have any rights to the womans body
No one has the right to life at the expense of anothers body In the case of a late abortion the fetus is not consious cannot feel
emotional pain or the sense of lost however it can feel physical pain so I would say the woman right
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 That's like saying "no one has the right to life at the expense of another's bankroll", but as tax payers, we sustain the lives of people all of the time. Government implemented institutions like orphanages and sanatoriums force us to keep people alive. Why is that acceptable?
So late term abortion shouldn't be available if the mother wasn't raped? Then it isn't fundamentally about a mother's right to her body, but how much pain the fetus may or may not be subjected to?
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn the tax payers only sustain the lives of others by monentary means only the government cant force people to do anything else It is one of the most painful ordeals when speaking of the entire world because in some countries its the leading cause of death for women I didnt misrepresent anything I already mention that more women in the us has been dying due to pregnancy complications defending the rights of women is also in the government jurisdiction and there is no conclusive evidence
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 that at the moment of conception a fetus is a human its a theory just like life starting at birth is a theory and life starting at consenus is a theory No its fundamently a womens right I just stated one possible exception that may or may not be debateable Legally speaking a women can get an abortion at any time in this country however if its late term the doctor usually puts the fetus on a machine and allow it to grow without the aid of the woman.
animejerk05 2 months ago
@Hatrimn due to health and mental risk would not surpass
the intense physical pain the fetus would recive however if the woman
was rape or her life was endanger and it was a late term abortion then
the womans absolute right to her life or a womans right not to feel severe
mental pain due to being force to carry her rapist child would surpass
the fetus physical pain it would feel and the woman has a right to an
abortion Now in the case of a woman seeking an abortion early on
animejerk05 2 months ago
@Hatrimn The fetus is not consious it cannot feel any physical or mental pain
cannot feel any sense of lost But the woman can feel physical and mental pain during the pregnancy and sense of lost of her well being health life style
and the pain of her personal belief ect so her right to her health and well being would surpass the fetus and
she would be allowed to get an abortion any time during early on during
the pregnacy If thats what she chooses
animejerk05 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Your comparing an impaired person or a person missing a limb to a microscopic fetus. your really putting the two on the same level
animejerk05 2 months ago
@Hatrimn the egg cell. And it also destroys newly formed zygote cells. Your a complete idiot if you think removing a zygote from a woman body and killing a cancer paitent is the same thing.
animejerk05 2 months ago
@Hatrimn A fetus isnt on the same level like a homosexual a black or another discrimatory group. Personhood at conception is a religious belief, not a provable biological fact like I said
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 "A fetus isnt on the same level like a homosexual a black or another discrimatory group."
Spoken like a historically duplicated bigot. "The thing I discriminate against isn't like them other groups that are accepted now, it's really different this time!" LOL
It is more of a religious belief to purport personhood at any other moment in a human being's life other than conception, as it is done using arbitrary and indeterminate parameters.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn Oh you really didn't dispute my statement Do you like random name calling Saying that at the exact moment of conception a fetus deserves full human rights is preposterous two-thirds of all fetuses are spontaneously aborted by nature Its called a miscarriage. My cousin went through 6 of those so far she got pregnant 6 times and she has yet to have even 1 baby A fetus is a potential life it has no soul and no distint human characteristics early on it cant even feel pain
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 Newborns don't have "distinct human characteristics" either. They can't do anything that H. sapiens are known to be capable of, yet they are still people. Physical and mental fitness varies, but the principle of equality extends basic rights to all humans.
How is feeling pain significant in determining personhood? Does that mean that people who are numb to pain lose any degree of personhood?... Nope.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn In most miscarriages the fetus is simply lost by the body or the body considers it to be foriegn and kills it. You are actually saying that a single celled zygote that can be lost by the woman at any time deserves full human rights. There is no evidence to support personhood at conception. A doctor can create 1million of your so called zygotes in a lab by taking 1million eggs from 1 woman and combining it with 1million sperm from 1 man. Do they all deserve full human rights in ur book
animejerk05 2 months ago
@animejerk05 You have utterly failed to explain how being susceptible to a premature death disqualifies a H. sapien from being a person.
The evidence for personhood at conception is in the classification of the species. Only bigots try to qualify certain H. sapiens while excluding others.
Yes, synthetically created H. sapiens would deserve the same rights as the rest of us.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn two-thirds of human conceptions are spontaneously aborted by nature. A woman choosing not to go through a pregency before the first trimester of growth is such a crime you should hang her. LOL funny
animejerk05 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@animejerk05 "two-thirds of human conceptions are spontaneously aborted by nature."
Yes, people die of natural causes all of the time. What is your point?
I don't want to hang criminals, I'm not an advocate of capital punishment.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@animejerk05 Saving the mother from a life threatening pregnancy is the only permissible scenerio for abortion because it can be construed as self-defense, which isn't murder.
LOL, inseparable conjoined twins are considered one person? No, they are considered two people who are conjoined. Way to be a crass douchebag. If you murdered conjoined twins (or more on topic: a pregnant mother), then you would be charged with two counts of murder.
Hatrimn 2 months ago
@Hatrimn No it cant be constructed as self defense because you directly said abortion is akin to murder. You said the act of Abortion is murder it cant be murder in some senarios and not in another thats illogical. Either abortion is murder or its not you cant have it both ways. If your claiming the act of abortion is murder then the doctor killing the sick fetus is still murder as the way you describe it.
animejerk05 2 months ago