That's ok. You're obviously just the type of person that has a belief and is not interested in gathering any further information on the matter, thus always stuck with that belief. You will find the video has nothing to do with women and rights, sometimes pre-empting doesn't work. It's about people in comas.
, I know all the information on the matter. Ya, I stick with facts. If it's about people in comas and nothing to do with women and rights then it has nothing to do with abortion.
Per Roe vs. Wade, at the time of viability (beginning of third trimester) the fetus has rights, or more specifically, the government has the power to protect it.
You have two people. 1) A person in hospital in a coma but in say, 6 months time, they're going to come out the coma and have full brain functionality. 2) A 12 week old person who will, say in 6 months time, they will have full brain functionality. Which one does society kill?
Ya, I agree....why would someone post about people in comas in an abortion forum.....and why would people not post their opinion on the topic.....weird , isn't it...??
If it's a person , it's been born and it's illegal to kill it. . There is no "person" before birth. A twelve week old "person" has been born for 12 weeks. "Society" doesn't kill either one.
That's a very thought-provoking comparison. There's a lot in common between those two situations, at least when it comes to how we measure brain function and decide to accord rights based on that function.
3) when significant brain function ceases to exist - the doctors pull the plug and the dirt nap begins. This living human - is no longer a person with rights including the right to life - at least by the coroner's definition. A person in a coma has significant brain function - for example - the person does not need outside assistance to keep the patient breathing or the heart beating. Your comparison is thus a false equivalency. One has significant brain function and the other does not. Your post also contains a logical fallacy - your assumption that the 12 week old fetus is a "person" a "living human". The central question of the abortion debate is whether or not the entity - throughout various stages of pregnancy - is a living human/ a person. Coming into the debate and just assuming this debate has been resolved is circular reasoning "its a person because its a person". In order to claim that a 12 week old fetus is a person - you need to show that this claim is true - and you have not done that.
Care to show EXACT posts where I said that or admit you ALTERED quotes . I am not surprised that Anti-Choicers have to use devious means because they have got nothing else.
Suppose instead..... There is a man in a coma in South Africa who will die without a liver transplant. You are the only one in the world who has a match. You are a single young woman with two kids and a low paying job. If you agree you will not be reimbursed, will probably lose your job for missing work and possibly have health issues in the future. Must you save his life?
The pregnancy to organ donation analogy fails because organ donation removes something permanent. A pregnancy, on the other hand, is a perfectly natural (if not slightly traumatic) process, and essentially the woman is just donating nutrients and loses nothing that won't regrow. Besides, a more apt analogy would be if the person being asked to donate part of their organ was the person who put that man in a coma in the first place.
