Explain why you can't smother your 1 and 2 year old

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I really can't understand why people say it's "so obvious" that a fetus is meaningfully different from a 1 year old, since, as someone said, life is a continuum. If it's life, it's life, We give different categories of human life different legal rights and responsibilities, as someone said, but there is only only category that we say has no rights whatever due to no act of its own.

Thanks again for sharing your views.

OP, a lot of people who are pro-choice nevertheless do see a difference between the morality of aborting an embry, or a fetus before 13 weeks gestation, verses a second or epseiclly third trimester abortion.

Some of us who have had a miscarriage of a fetus at 6 or 8 or 10 weeks gestation really have a gut sense that this "cluster of cells" just isn't a "person" and yet we would very much agree that a fetus at 39 weeks gestation (or 28 weeks -- capable of possibly living on its own once born) is a "person". But there's a huge difference between the cluster of cells at 5 weeks or 8 weeks gestation, and a fully developed fetus at 37 or 38 weeks.

It's obvious to me that an embryo is different from a 1 year old, in terms of rights which we should give it, which is in my opinion, to sya, no rights. But a 38 week old fetus should not be aborted... and I think most laws do not allow it to be (I could be wrong).

[Anonymous]

12:13, OP again. This is helpful, thanks.

[Anonymous]

A little of topic, but I don't see Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson marching for justice for those 2 poor kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little of topic, but I don't see Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson marching for justice for those 2 poor kids.

I did not hear about the march. Please do not assume my absence indicates approval of the murders. I assume you are there; where is it being held.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I really can't understand why people say it's "so obvious" that a fetus is meaningfully different from a 1 year old, since, as someone said, life is a continuum. If it's life, it's life, We give different categories of human life different legal rights and responsibilities, as someone said, but there is only only category that we say has no rights whatever due to no act of its own.

Thanks again for sharing your views.

OP, a lot of people who are pro-choice nevertheless do see a difference between the morality of aborting an embry, or a fetus before 13 weeks gestation, verses a second or epseiclly third trimester abortion.

Some of us who have had a miscarriage of a fetus at 6 or 8 or 10 weeks gestation really have a gut sense that this "cluster of cells" just isn't a "person" and yet we would very much agree that a fetus at 39 weeks gestation (or 28 weeks -- capable of possibly living on its own once born) is a "person". But there's a huge difference between the cluster of cells at 5 weeks or 8 weeks gestation, and a fully developed fetus at 37 or 38 weeks.

It's obvious to me that an embryo is different from a 1 year old, in terms of rights which we should give it, which is in my opinion, to sya, no rights. But a 38 week old fetus should not be aborted... and I think most laws do not allow it to be (I could be wrong).

The point about life being a continuum is that we nevertheless willingly make distinctions. If you say life is life, then maybe it's consistent if you are a vegan. If, however, you are a pet owner or meat/fish eater, you are already drawing lines through life's continuum. So the "life is life" argument fails right there. Once you have done that, it is reasonable to ask what is so uniquely special about a fetus of one species, that does not apply to full grown, living and sensing creatures of another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little of topic, but I don't see Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson marching for justice for those 2 poor kids.

Maybe there isn't enough press coverage for them to attend, or because it isn't race related since the perpetrator is the victims' mother.

[Anonymous]

OP, I agree with your argument in 8:57 completely. People who argue that an embryo or fetus is not a human being are rationalizing to make themselves feel better. To say that abortion is justifiable at any stage means that you believe that the rights of the mother outweigh the rights of a embryo or fetus. If you want to say you're okay with that and that you're pro-choice, fine, but at least have the guts to be honest about what you are saying. You are saying that there are certain circumstances where it is okay to kill another human being. Another example that most people seem to be fine with is killing in self-defense. But it is all still killing a human being. Where we are drawing the lines is as to what circumstances allow that to be "okay".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:a fetus is a potential person.

Then you should be arrested for murdering a potential person with each of your monthly cycles.

And you need to go back to high school biology to learn the difference between an unfertilized egg and a fertilized one. What a stupid response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I agree with your argument in 8:57 completely. People who argue that an embryo or fetus is not a human being are rationalizing to make themselves feel better. To say that abortion is justifiable at any stage means that you believe that the rights of the mother outweigh the rights of a embryo or fetus. If you want to say you're okay with that and that you're pro-choice, fine, but at least have the guts to be honest about what you are saying. You are saying that there are certain circumstances where it is okay to kill another human being. Another example that most people seem to be fine with is killing in self-defense. But it is all still killing a human being. Where we are drawing the lines is as to what circumstances allow that to be "okay".

If you believe that a fetus is a person, then everything you say logically follows. But what basis do you have for calling an embryo or a fetus a human being? This is the issue at the center of the debate.

You can't say "well, of course it's a human being!" and expect the rest of the world to believe you. There are plenty of arguments to say that it is not yet a person. Accusing someone of rationalizing their self interest is not a proof of the humanness of a fetus. You have to dig deeper than that. There has to be some biological, philosophical, or religious definition of what it means to be a person or else it's all just a bunch of name calling.

And this same comment should equally apply to pro-choice people. You can't merely say "it's a woman's body", or "it's just a clump of cells". There are plenty of arguments to say that this is uniquely different from a woman's body.

I have yet to hear a decent point in either direction on what a fetus or embryo actually is. And without that, this is not a discussion at all.

[Anonymous]

Please. If men could get pregnant abortion would be a matter of fact rite of passage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please. If men could get pregnant abortion would be a matter of fact rite of passage.

This is about as intelligent as the other side's argument that women are rationalizing their self interest. It does not address the philosophical issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please. If men could get pregnant abortion would be a matter of fact rite of passage.

And every family would have only one child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP -- the difference is clear to me -- that a woman who doesn't want a baby, toddler or whatever age human being has the option of relinquishing rights to the child, and that child can be cared for by others.

A woman who doesn't want an embryo or fetus in her body doesn't have any way to turn the gestation of that embryo or fetus over to another person.

Oh, I wasn't aware that women are also supposed to be brood mares for other women. Bull dung!

[Anonymous]

16:43 again: "wasn't aware that SOME women were supposed to be brood mares for other women."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please. If men could get pregnant abortion would be a matter of fact rite of passage.

And every family would have only one child.

And they would probably pick a male child and abandon girls just like in China!