Reply to NYT story: Trump administration could strike abortion almost immediately using Comstock law

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "NYT story: Trump administration could strike abortion almost immediately using Comstock law"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It is the potential for life. It is not a human being.

I could lay before  you the million parts that make an automobile. But that is not a car, even though every piece that would make it a car is there.

[/quote]

No offense, but this is incredibly ignorant and completely anti-science.  An "embryo" and "fetus" are both stages of human life -- period.  They are "alive" by any definition.  The car analogy is laughable.  A human life is created when an egg and sperm combine.  Before that, there is no life -- by definition.  Once they combine to create an embryo, that is a living human being -- again, by definition.

If it is not a living human being, what is it?  And then when does it become a human being?  Surely you can't base that on simply exiting the woman, so when?  Viability as the measure makes no sense because that keeps changing, and a baby is never viable on its own.  [/quote]

The answer is actually not absolute.   Different faiths believe different things.  Sorry that frustrates you but that is how it is.[/quote]

We aren't talking about faiths.  This is science.  An embryo and a fetus are living things, and they are not plants.  That isn't debatable.  So what living things are they?  They are obviously human, by definition.  Again, this is science, not religion.  You keep saying different "faiths," but then how would your "faith" define when something becomes "human" or is "human enough" to be worthy of protection? [/quote]

When it can live on its own, then it comes first. Before that, the woman comes first.

This should be ironclad.

[/quote]

OK, that is a policy choice, and that is a different discussion.  We were debating whether abortion is killing a human life, which it is by definition.

But to address your point, a baby can never live on its own, and "viability" changes over time and based on different parts of the world.  So "viability" has always been a red herring.  The idea that a baby deserves full protection at a certain week because technology at that point in time and place means it can be saved outside the womb, but it deserves zero protection a day earlier in its life (or weeks later if this was 50 years ago or in a poor country) -- well, that is just silly.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics