Abortions and the bible.

OK. I disagree. For reason already stated. We have our opinions, but lets not mince any sort of biological fact from this statement.
When human development begins is settled science. Our experience of it has different milestones. You may value some more than others but that isn’t the issue. I don’t place as much value on children who live on the other side of the planet. That doesn’t determine their value.
People celebrate when they find out they are pregnant. Why is your opinion superior to theirs? It isn’t.

Also - since you stated I should take a biology course - I would like to know the demarcation in the human lifecycle on when decay starts and development ends. It isn't surprising you just left that out of your response. Please educate me since you think I need it.
Why? It’s irrelevant to the issue. Plus it’s an uncontroversial statement. Our bodies reach a point where they no longer grow. That’s called adulthood. Then our bodies begin to lose their
Muscles lose elasticity and mass. Hormones diminish. You name it.

So? I'm not trying to assuage anything. I am placing value at the realization of a person. I don't consider genetic material a person. At some point in the development process that material becomes a real person with real capacity and that is where my moral concern starts.
Sure you do. Every human is the same genetic material that started at conception and implantation. Yes, that continues to reach milestones in the development process, just like you did. Your moral concern is irrelevant. Their are people who lack concern for any humans.



I am not destroying a person. I may be destroying potential, and to that I say so what. I have no moral qualms with destroying something that is not a person. Even if there is a chance it will be a person, the simple fact remains until a certain point it isn't. When you murder someone, you are destroying a person AND potential.
When any born person dies, the ONLY thing that is taken is their potential.
Pregnancy is much more than a “chance.” LOL
 
Soooooo, what is the "magic" number for the pro-choice crowd?

>28 weeks is generally considered a late term abortion, I don't know anyone who advocates for that allowance. I only speak for myself.
 
>28 weeks is generally considered a late term abortion, I don't know anyone who advocates for that. I only speak for myself.

There are lawmakers that advocate for the child to be delivered and laid on a table to fin for them self. I would say that they think the age of being "capable" is several months after birth?
 
There are lawmakers that advocate for the child to be delivered and laid on a table to fin for them self. I would say that they think the age of being "capable" is several months after birth?

I'm confused by your tactics here. Generally, once the baby is born the right stops giving a sht about the wellbeing of the child.

617880671.jpg


Let's stay on topic.
 
I'm confused by your tactics here. Generally, once the baby is born the right stops giving a sht about the wellbeing of the child.

Let's stay on topic.

Nice try.......you are talking to a foster/adoptive parent.......I do more than "give a shat" about kids.
The point is, the legality of killing a child will continue to be stretched as long as it is legal at any age/stage.
 
Nice try.......you are talking to a foster/adoptive parent.......I do more than "give a shat" about kids.
The point is, the legality of killing a child will continue to be stretched as long as it is legal at any age/stage.

Personal anecdotes and slippery slope fallacy's make for unconvincing arguments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MercyPercy
It is also to remove a glob of cells. It is illegal to kill a human being, but you still have to qualify as a human being. My personal line is still in order to be classified as a human being it must be capable of surviving outside the womb. Until such a time, it merely has the potential of being a human being.
So until the age of say.....10? 12? it isn't a human being? I would say about zero healthy infants can survive outside the womb without considerable assistance. Most adolescents and teens as well. Heck a bunch of grown people too.
 
There is no legal obligation for a mother to provide for her children. She can drop them off at the firehouse ending any such obligation. You have decided that she should be forced to carry the unborn to term.

Actually, there is a legal obligation to provide for one's children. A safe haven law provides for a conditional surrender of parental rights. But assuming that one doesn't comply with the conditions of the law, one can be in all kinds of legal hot water for failing to take care of one's children.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
Get off the "explanation" of why I care and address the point that I brought up.
Where does the "capable" age/stage start?

capable of what? Living outside of the womb? I believe 28 weeks is the generally accepted age.
 
A largely unviable fetus.
Again, what is viable? Able to exist without assistance? Like others have said, by that definition, there are probably a BILLION or more people in this world that have already been born that fall into that category.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
Almost all creatures develop from a fetus, so what is this particular fetus if not human?

Until its viable, it's more a of a parasite than a human child.

With due respect, this is a losing argument - my advice would be to appeal to the fact that abortion is snuffing the life out of a potentially sentient being, which is morally indefensible.
 
capable of what? Living outside of the womb? I believe 28 weeks is the generally accepted age.

It seems that not too long ago you were arguing that killing a baby at any time was perfectly acceptable. You were all for late term abortion/births and killing the child.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols

VN Store



Back
Top