1-It's a woman's right to control her own body 2-What about women who would preform illegal abortions if abortion was illegal again? 3-What about rape, incest, or the life or health of the mother? 4-Abortion is legal 5-A fetus/embryo isn't a person 6-Abortion will happen anyway even if it's illegal 7-A fetus that isn't viable isn't a perosn 8-What if the pregnancy was unwanted 1-The fetus is inside of her body, but it's a separate genetic organism that lives inside of her. 2-The amount of women that died as a result of unsafe illegal abortions is much less than the amount of fetuses that died when abortion was legalized. 3-Those instances are very rare, only at most 5% of all abortions. And an unborn human being is no less of a person just because it was conceived in a horrible way. If the life of the mother is at stake, and neither one of them (the mother and the fetus) will survive, then, yes, abortion should be legal then. But that's only 1% of all abortions. 4-Slavery and the holocaust were legal too. You cant just say that abortion is OK just because it's legal. 5-Oh, so location and viability determines personhood. The nazis also argued that certain traits make a human being less than a person. 6-By that logic, all criminal actions should be legalized since it'll happen anyways. The truth is that laws don't stop all criminals, they stop some horrible crimes from happening because having laws does keep order to a certain extent. Abortion would still happen if it was illegal, but not as much as when it is legal. 7-So, a person in a coma that depends on a life support system doesn't have the right to live? 8-That arguement only works if the fetus isn't a person. For if the fetus isn't a person, you're saying that taking innocent life is justified because of unwantedness, which is also what the Nazis said-the nazis believed that unwanted people didn't have the right to live.
Abortion is not threatening the survival of our species, procreation is about the survival of our species . There are over 200m humans born every year, a few more a few less does not make a difference. There have all your "pro-life" arguments refuted .
1. So is a tapeworm, your point is, an up until the point that the fetus is viable outside of her body then in my opinion it should be her choice. 2. Proof please 3. nobody says it isn't a life (human or otherwise), I just find it quite sad that people would force a woman to go through with an incest or rape pregnancy. So suddenly the fetus loses its right to life, why, doesn't it have the right to live just as much as the mother, and does this mean you would stop any abortion where the fetus would survive but the mother wouldn't? 4. Already debunked the analogy between slavery, holocaust and abortion and whether it is illegal or not isn't really the point 5. So what does determine personhood .. just your opinion it would seem 6. In essence you are right. 7. Irrelevant as the person in a coma and on live support has at some point been an individual sentient born person, a fetus has never been .. it has the potential to be, but so does an acorn have the potential to be an oak. 8. Personhood is a hotly disputed item, although the majority opinion is that it should not be given until the point that conscious thought and action are apparent. Your analogy to Nazi's is incorrect, for one it was not an accepted premise for the majority of the worlds population, one of the reasons we fought a world war.
So why not permanently solve poverty by euthenizing the poor? Why not put an end to racism in your country with a good ethnic cleansing? The ridiculousness of some of these arguments choicers try to use really becomes apparent if one tries to apply their warped logic to any other issue. The only thing choicers have to fall back on is to deny that the fetus is even a human being, which of course creates its own set of logical inconsistencies when we look at pregnant women who do not want an abortion. Pro-choicers of course know that the fetus is not merely just an inanimate object. They just want to use whatever they can to justify getting out of a pregnancy.
Why do you keep posting these things when you alreayd have and they have been refuted? Couldn't you understand the first dozen times your position was slam dunked into the toilet???
One of the areas I think pro-lifers should be focusing on more is dismantling the myth that women "need" abortions.
When did being a separate organism grant you rights? Quite literally you could say that a fertilized egg in a petri dish is a separate organism, it doesn't make it a person though that has to be proven. You are assuming a fetus is always "alive" (I assume you mean the ability of consciousness) we know that a fertilized egg is not alive and we know a baby is, so the most logical thing to say is a fetus develops the ability of consciousness in sometime during the pregnancy as we already do. I agree with the logic behind the statement as it's right but you assign personhood to something that has not been proven until such a time comes I'll agree with the current science. I agree but tend to think it should go to all cases instead of just specific one like this. I agree that's why I would never use this argument it's fallacious. Do you believe a fertilized egg is not a person? Do you believe cloned meat is not a person? If you say no you are just like the Nazis. Do you see how your logic fails? Everyone agrees there are conditions on personhood so we have to provide evidence for it, it isn't hard to understand. The real question is why should it be illegal and what is the safest possible way for it to be done. A person in a coma is still conscious as they still have brain activity.
Because killing the poor (like 50% of mankind) or entire nations is selective reduction of our gene pool ! I am not denying that self replicating soup of cells is a human being i just do not see the purpose of bringing to life unwanted children or what we miss by aborting them.
