I find that when debating (arguing . .take your pick) with pro-lifers that there are prone to hypocrisy in certain situations. We know all to well that the majority of pro-lifers consider there to be a 'person at conception' and based on this they want all elective abortion to be illegal .. and yet ask them where their outrage is for the thousands of embryos "murdered" in in vitro clinics and the silence or excuses are thick and fast. Why do we not see pro-life protestors outside of in vitro clinics calling doctors etc who work there "murderers"? Why do we not see pro-life lawyers and politicians trying to enact TRAP laws to make in vitro treatments as hard as possible? Why do we not see reams and reams of topics dealing with the "murder" of these innocent 'babies' flushed down sluices? Then we have the issue of chimera twins. Two separate ovum that merge at some point in development, yet according to pro-lifers those two fertilized ovum are 'persons', they argue that location, development stage or viability are not relevant as far as abortion is concerned, then use exactly the same arguments to justify removing a submissive chimera twin from the dominant one which usually ends in its death .. so in fact they are just being arbitrary as to exactly what a 'person' is, either it is a person at conception or it is not, by what right do pro-lifers have to first insist that the law recognise a fertilized ovum as a person and then at a later date decide that-that law doesn't apply in certain circumstances? Raised these issues before and have never really received any adequate answers to the glaring discrepancies in pro-life logic.
I think of the issue of invitro fertilization a lot when it comes to the abortion debate. They kill so many embryos in the process of trying to become pregnant, why is this not as big of an issue to them as a woman actively seeking to end her pregnancy? Is it because people who use invitro are actively seeking to have a child? They realize that it's a touchy subject and don't want to step on the fingers and toes of would-be parents or people who have been trying with difficulty for years to conceive a child? But when it's a woman who is barely surviving alone in poverty seeking an abortion they come down on her like a sack of judgmental bricks. I see the hypocrisy. It is amusing to say the least.
You are definitely spot on about the hypocrisy regarding IVF. I don't know that much about chimeric twins, but I was under the impression that the dominant one absorbed the other one(s) entirely into it's own body very early in the development process, resulting in anomalies in DNA, chromosomes, blood types, etc. Siamese and conjoined twins are something different, and I would think in those cases it would be parallel to allowing abortion in the cases of severe risk to the life or health of the mother.
Not always entirely; There is also the interesting case of the woman who was suffering from acute renal failure, it was decided that a kidney transplant was required and as standard hospital procedure her family were tested for compatibility . .two of her three sons were found to not be genetically her sons, even though her medical records showed that she had been pregnant and had given birth to them .. further investigation showed that the one of her ovaries was that of her chimera twin and the ovum released were a different genetic profile to the woman herself, as far as the genetic evidence showed she was their aunt not their mother. Now at the point of fertilization both of the examples above were separate and under the person at conception ideology would be deemed as persons with the same rights as you, me and any other person... Pro-lifers already insist that location, gestation period, and development are irrelevant to the abortion debate, and yet the they have no problem with the submissive 'person' being surgically removed and thus ending their life .. The boy in the picture, there was no threat to his life. So the conclusion must be made that the person at conception is only mandated by pro-lifers IF it meets the acceptance and criteria of their opinion.
I think the example provided is one of those grey areas. One can believe that the submissive twin was an individual person at conception and then "died" as one when it became fused with the dominant one. Or they can believe the fact the submissive twin will be a physical burden on the dominant one for the rest of his natural life and has zero chance of ever being able to exist independently again mitigates it (if the they make the same exception for abortion where the situation is parallel). One might also be argue that the submissive twin isn't killed if a significant part of it continues to live on inside the dominant one.
Not to mention the 50% or more that God kills through spontaneous abortion (miscarriage). Whats up with that? Why does he kill up to 80% of his creations?
How's that in any way relevant? Ultimately god/nature/whatever you wanna call it kills 100% of its creations.
Sorry but that does not equate to the pro-life stance of location, development or viability not having any relevance. Please explain how the submissive twin is "dead"? Again being a burden is, according to pro-lifers, not a reason to kill. As far as I am aware pro-lifers only agree with abortion if the females life is in danger and some pro-lifers believe that it is ok for rape and incest. The life of the boy in the picture was not in danger, neither was he "raped" or subjected to "incest" to cause his submissive twin to be alive. In the case of the woman, that is true .. however .. for the boy and others like him, the removal of the submissive twin ALWAYS leads to it's death.
AIUI, many (if most) cases chimeric phenomena result in the body of the sub being completely absorbed and integrated by the dominant one, thus it would permanently cease to exist as a living individual, i.e. "die". Cases where they're only partially absorbed and infused are a grey area, but it's clear in the example you gave in the photo that the submissive twin's development was arrested before it could develop a head and brain, and it never will. Most pro-lifers I know would take quality of life into account and make exceptions for abortion in cases where the child is so severely deformed that it will never be able to develop into a functioning adult human being, or it would cause a permanent significant disability to the mother. If you're talking only about "pro-lifers" who don't make these exceptions, then yes I'd agree their stance is hypocritical if they don't oppose splitting chimeric and conjoined twins unless both can be saved.
IVF is another tripping stone for the "pro-lifers". On one hand their supposed love of pregnancy makes them look kindly on women having fertility troubles tryiing to get pregnant. On the other, the "person at conception" thing screws that up since IVF means hundreds of "babies" destroyed every year in such clinics. So they find it Yet Another Moral "Grey Area"...and they can't handle such things, morally or intellectually.
Nah, you're totally right, bro. People just become people whenever other people recognize them as such. Which of course creates the logical problem that someone else must first recognize the person doing the recognizing as a person in order for them to be able to make that call..... which creates an endless cycle of non-persons waiting for personhood approval from other non-persons..... but hey, who needs logic? Logic is against wimminz rightz, you know.
So you choose to ignore the OP and just comment with something that has nothing to do with it .. standard really. BTW on a personally level I really don't care whether a zef is legally seen as a person or not, it makes not a single difference to the argument in favour of abortion .. in fact is strengthens it.
Just wanted to make a comment on your signature line, it's ironic in what it says. You really don't see that "Anything that denies the victim a voice in their own fate" describes pro-lifers so very well. There is, in fact, no such thing as pro-life . .truthfully it is pro-forced pregnancy and birth or pro-American life only.
