Everyone Calls it a Baby When She's Not Having an Abortion

No it only has as much value as the person carrying it if I must clarify further. She doesn't even have to inform the man she slept with that she is pregnant and since she is the only one who can ultimately choose to carry it to term or abort it his opinion is irrelevant. If she would like his opinion she will ask him.

 

well scientifically it is a person. legally is subjective, as it was legal to own a black man as your worker for 120 bucks back in the day. and beat him up and possibly kill him too. and logically, we were all once a fetus. and we are all thankful to be alive now. so logically we should give that right to ALL people. not just the wanted ones

life isnt a game, you roll the dice if your parents want you then your safe, if they dont. youre dead.... logically, legally, and scientifically your side does not make sense

 

so men have no rights to their kids then.... so if your a man, tough (*)(*)(*)(*). cant even defend your own kids lives. anti men at its finest

 

Please show us where Science determines that a fetus is a person.

Agreed.

Yes we were, doesn't mean we were people.

Proof of this please. I can already line up several stories where people have declared they wish they were dead or even aborted.

There are a lot of problems with giving zygotes/embryos/fetuses personhood though.

Some of those problems are proving they exist to begin with (forced ultrasounds/blood tests?)
How will you confer personhood and legal status to them? We are all given a birth certificate that confers our personhood and grants us our legal rights as citizens. In the USA that's all covered under the 14th amendment and is only for citizens born or naturalized in the country.
What will you do about the conflicting rights in this situation between woman and zygote/embryo/fetus? I can list off several conflicting instances if you'd like.

 

proof? you really need proof to know that most people alive today wish they were living??

 

You said ALL. If you meant most you should have said so. However if you would like to see the stats on suicide rates you might be surprised. http://www.cbn.com/spirituallife/biblestudyandtheology/perspectives/arrington_suicide_myths.aspx

Also you missed these questions.

There are a lot of problems with giving zygotes/embryos/fetuses personhood though.

 

well... when you have one persons rights hindered for a couple of months vs another persons RIGHT TO EXISTENCE. there really is no argument....

 

That is a very slippery slope you are advocating there .. You are happy to allow a section of people to be deemed less rights than the rest of the population for a period of time .. didn't the US try that already at guantanamo.

I need to ask, do you support the death penalty, because if you do you are removing a persons right to existence.

 

Do people have a right to exist? At what point is that right removed? During war? If they committed a crime? If they are infringing on the bodily autonomy of another human being and putting that person's health/life at risk? (Few examples, rape, assault, pregnancy) etc.?

 

course i do. i believe in justice. punishment for the guilty, and freedom for the innocent. advocating a death sentence on a purely innocent human who has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG goes against who i am.... goes against my faith, and anyone's conscience.... it also goes against the whole american way of life, and goes against our judicial system...

 

every innocent human has a right to exist. once you are guilty of attempting major harm against another human. or when you actually do major harm (murder, etc) then i believe you lose your right to life.

its simple, really. justice for the innocent. justice for the guilty. protect the innocent, and hunt down the guilty. its not that hard of a concept to understand

 

Your world view is horribly black and white. If only life really were that simple.

The problem here is that a fetus can harm a woman's body. It may not be doing it on purpose but it can. Does the woman have a right to defend her own body and life by having an abortion? Is she guilty of murder if she kills the fetus to protect herself?

 

if she is going to die in childbirth without an abortion. then i say it should be her choice to abort or not. everyone has a right to defend themselves

however... anything short of death or serious injury there should NOT be an abortion. again no innocent life should be taken out of convenience. out of necessity for survival, then i cant force anyone to die for another person. but you owe the child life otherwise. its the least a mother could do, as opposed to killing the child out of connivence.

 

I have highlighted the word faith here simply because your faith actually says that that the sins of the father will be punished onto the third and forth generation, so the zygote/fetus etc is not innocent .. There is also the belief by some Christians that we are all born into sin (Original sin)

It doesn't matter what you believe the fact still remains that by supporting the death penalty you are removing the right of existence from someone.

 

yeah, but not an innocent person. people who are guilty of serious crimes against others forfeit their rights.

 

Which is completely irrelevant. Do you deny the fact that the death penalty removes a persons right to existence, a simple yes or no will suffice.

As already shown to you according to the Christian faith none are innocent.

 

There is a risk of death with every pregnancy and considering that every minute a woman dies from complications due to pregnancy and childbirth I believe women have a right to reduce or eliminate this risk, along with the many other risks involved with pregnancy via abortion if they so choose. I don't believe it is right that the only time she should be free to abort is if she is dying on a surgeon's table.

http://www.who.int/features/qa/12/en/index.html

I strongly disagree with this, I also strongly disagree with using the term 'convenience' to describe pregnancy as it is hardly a convenience. That term totally minimizes and insults every single mother who has gone through an entire pregnancy and given birth.

 

every single mother is a hero... according to you theyre a sap for not having an abortion.

 

So - having cared for more women in that situation than I like to count - tell me just when do you make the decision? Remembering if we leave it too late we lose BOTH - when do we decide the woman is at enough risk to be granted an abortion - and does she have a say in this?

What degree of "serious injury" would you accept? Permanent renal failure? Heart failure that may of may not improve? Mental illness?

And yes there are women who end pregnancies early for "convenience" but they invariably opt for early Caesarian section - why not? They have already done the hard yards in carrying it this far - a little further will not hurt and then it can go to NICU (unbelievable but true and yet they are not vilified the way the poor woman who finds she is carrying a baby that will never survive is vilified for choosing not to go through with a heart breaking childbirth

- - - Updated - - -

STRAWMAN!!

Abortion is a necessary evil - we don't like it but until there is a 100% effective contraceptive then it will always be with us

 

There is a 99.5% way to prevent pregnancy. It's called abstinence. There's a reason sex should be within a committed relationship, so that if a baby is brought into the world, there are two loving parents available to care for it.

If a woman still wants to engage in sexual intercourse with outside partners, she has numerous contraceptive options, and she can combine more than one together to reduce her chances of getting pregnant to nearly zero. Condoms have a 98% effectiveness against pregnancy, and that is for a whole year's worth of sexual intercourse! Most women seeking abortions never even bothered to use a condom.

A woman can also combine a diaphragm with a condom. Combined together, they have a 99.7% effectiveness rate (per year). And a birth control pill can be added on top of all this. If for some reason the woman "doesn't like the feel of a condom", a birth control pill has a 96% effectiveness rate if used properly. Spermacide is 82% effective (per year). Again, the woman can combine any two (or three) of these options together. And of course, the per year rate of effectiveness for all these options will rise dramatically if the woman just engages in sexual intercourse less frequently.

And you know, there are ways to have sex that cannot result in pregnancy...

 

Why do you think women should be perfect and never make mistakes but no one else has to be perfect?

Why do you think human nature will change and people will stop having sex ?

It hasn't in several thousand years.



When YOU make a mistake do YOU wallow in it, or do you DO something about it?

 

Well that BS for a start, I'd love to see where you get your figures from do you just pluck them out of the air.

 

No one believes this. Not even you.

 

Please show me where I have ever said that.

Pro-choicers see pregnancy for what it is and we see that it is something difficult for women to put themselves through and that it should be a choice and never forced.

 

thats for the doctor to say, when they can determine that without a doubt the pregnancy will result in the death of one or both mother or child. and no this doesnt mean if the child will die soon after birth.

of course she has a say. if she wants to go through with the pregnancy anyways, thats her right and choice. there has been stories out there of mothers/babies who were expected to die during the pregnancies. however it turned out that they lived. miracles happen. in that situation you cant force a mother one way or the other

SERIOUS injury... paralyzing.... extreme internal damage. stuff of that nature.

- - - Updated - - -

not really. pro choicers see it from one point of view(like the slave owner's POV). when there are TWO involved. weather you like it or not.