Unfortunately, the tomatos feel differently.
Well, if the tomatoes are coming to kill you it’s not murder either, it’s self defense. Using that song against them might be considered a war crime though. 
If they are badly damaged enough to be the equivalent of a fetus then they are effectively brain dead, and we disassemble bodies for their organs in that condition. So yes, it’s OK to kill those bodies (there isn’t really any person there to kill).
The moment a fetus pipes up and says it wants sovereignty, I’ll change my mind.
Pulling the plug on a person in a coma with the same activity as a one-month old fetus is not murder.
I won’t. It can pipe up and say that it’s got the solution to Fermat’s theorem, a cure for cancer, and incontrovertable proof of God, it still doesn’t get to use my uterus without my consent.
Why not? You created it without its consent.
So what? I created my daughter without her consent, but I can’t be legally obliged to give her my liver. Not even a lobe.
“I demand a womb with a view!”
Having a baby doesn’t require you to give up an organ. Or a lobe.
Not moving the goalposts at all. You claimed there was no significant difference between shed blood cells and fetus. I pointed out one significant difference. But that’s only one. There are others.
But let me ask you, and all the others who claim to know the objective, scientific definition of a “person”, what is that definition? What is the objective moment when a person comes into being? Tell me what that moment is, and how you prove that it is objectively the moment of personhood, as opposed to any other moment.
It requires me to incubate said baby in my body for nine months, which requires changes in my behavior for the duration and changes in my body forever. I don’t wanna. And you can’t make me. Live with it.
By the way, I can’t even be legally obliged to donate blood to my own daughter, which requires nothing of me but a pint of soon replaced blood and thirty minutes of my life.
You sure? You might want to peruse though some of the complications of pregnancy. Maybe something like gestational hypertension could lead to acute fatty liver, requiring a liver transplant, assuming the mother doesn’t die first. But I could be wrong, what do I know? Slut probably deserves it.
Yes, you’ve made it abundantly clear in past threads that you couldn’t care less about whether an unborn baby suffers, and that you aren’t going to put your precious self out one iota for anything or anyone. It wasn’t my expectation that you would say otherwise. I just get tired of this specious “you can’t tell me what to do with my own body” meme. A baby is a separate entity, created by you and temporarily housed inside your body. Pro-lifers aren’t interested in what you do with your own body; they’re interested in is protecting the life and feelings of the individual being that you created through actions of your own.
:rolleyes:
I want the right to expel any unwanted object from my body.
Pregnant women want that right, too? Okay, in the interest of fairness…
Oh please. Stop downplaying the rigors of pregnancy. You literally have no idea what it’s like to be nauseous for weeks on end or to feel like your internal organs have been reduced to the size of a ping pong ball. During my last pregnancy I spent almost a month on IV’s in the third trimester because I kept throwing up. I lost ten pounds.
Like it or not the fetus resides inside the woman. We’re not your incubators unless we say so. If the birth control fails the anti-abortionists don’t get veto power in the name of their morals and religious beliefs.
And I get tired of the specious argument that a fetus somehow deserves the right to use my body without my consent, a right that no other being on earth has. Just out of curiosity, if there were a way to put it in YOUR body, would you sign up? Saving the babies, and all?
And just to head off your nonsense at the pass, never mind that I made it. Are you interested in saving the baby or not?
Crap, you’re right, someone else has to give up a liver so the mother doesn’t die, since her liver is toast.
Which brings up an interesting twist. If we decide that the government has control over the mother’s body and can force her to be pregnant. But the mother needs a liver to live and stay pregnant. Can the government force someone else to donate a liver? You know, to save the baby?
No, we’re not talking about a swallowed fly or a lightbulb somebody stuck up our ass (yeah, it happens. Ask any doctor. :D) We are talking about a living, feeling human being. And an innocent one at that, who had no say in its creation. Granted, having a light bulb up your ass or a baby in your womb is a distinction lost on some people, but they really aren’t the same.
I’m doing nothing of the sort. The Supreme Court has ruled that women can get abortions, and frankly, assuming it’s done early enough so that the baby is most likely not sentient, I don’t have that much of a problem with it. I just get tired of this silly, militant nonsense of “they can’t tell me what to do with my own body”, which, as I said, is not what pro-lifers are out to accomplish.
As I just said to LavenderBlue, under the right circumstances I have no problem with abortion. I am fully aware, having gone through my former wife’s pregnancy and the birth of our daughter, what women are in for during pregnancy. And I’m not particularly in favor of babies being brought into the world and forced to live with people who never wanted them in the first place. My objection, once again, is with the meme that anyone who finds abortion objectionable and wants to halt it is trying to tell women what they can do with “their own bodies”, which IMO is not only inaccurate but deliberately and dishonestly combative.
In what way? Please be specific, and cite other instances where people are entitled to use of my organs over my objections.
I never said there were other instances where people were entitled to use of your organs over your objections, so I’m a bit mistified as to why you’re asking me to cite them.
ETA: It wasn’t my intent to ignite yet another abortion thread, and given that I’ve said what I have to say regarding the use of the term in question, I think I’ll bow out of the thread now.
I’m asking you to explain how it’s deliberately and dishonestly combative to claim that people who wish to deny me an abortion seek to deny me sovereignty over my body. You’re claiming that it’s not their primary concern is for the fetus, but since the fetus can’t be kept in my body against my will without denying me that sovereignty, you need to do some 'splainin.