No; I point out that before birth it’s physically attached to the woman and drawing on her own metabolism to survive; while after it’s born it is physically separate and can be kept alive by a guy with a milk bottle and blankets. That’s not arbitrary.
In contrast, the rule that says someone is an adult at 18 is immensely arbitrary. It’s not like people aged 17 years, 364 days have a “child” part of their brains that goes silent the following day.
The abortion line is not drawn at birth.
Well, it can be and in some places, is.
I believe a woman and her doctor should make the decisions of her personal life not others. I don’t tell others to live by my rules or beliefs She is not breaking any laws,and should not be forced to go by someone else’s idea of morality. It is just as immoral to force a woman to bear a child that she does not have the ability finacially, mentally, physically, etc. to care for, because some other person thinks she should.Only a woman knows what she can or cannot bear. If you are a Christian I would remind you that Jesus is quoted as saying," let he who is without sin cast the first stone". There were abortions during that time, as Archeologists found many small skeletons near houses of illrepute.A woman has the Right to Life too.I say let her God judge her.
That doesn’t answer my question.
In your opinion only[sup]TM[/sup].
Also a matter of opinion.
As a matter of law, not opinion. If you would prefer to draw the abortion line at birth, that’s a matter of opinion.
The answer to your question is that: I don’t try to force a woman to comply with my beliefs, and yes, I have sacrificed a lot over the years for others. There was a time I didn’t have anything to eat,from Friday nights 'till Monday mornings.
I have also given what money I had to a woman whose son was in the hospital.I had no need to sacrifice my children’s needs, but I wouldn’t expect some other person to go with out the nesessities so i could have my beliefs forced on them! I never was in the situation that some women are in and I can’t chose what they do with their bodies or in the privacy of their own homes. I believe the womans life is important,and only she knows what she can bear.I have plenty to do working on my own life to worry about what others are doing, so long as they are not breaking a law etc. I also believe if a person is doing something in self defense then that is their business as well!
So now the law matters? How convenient that it matters when it disagrees with me, but not when it agrees with me.
Call it my interpretation of his response.
Ok, I don’t buy Malthusian reasoning and I take a Utilitarian view of abortion in opposition to Peter Singer, for instance (that when the child can feel pain, abortions should not be permitted, barring considerable harm to the mother). However, there is a Malthusian argument that abortion involves a degree of altruism. One sacrifices one’s own progeny in order to maintain a decent standard of living for the community.
It sucks for me to say this, but Der Trihs has a point. He has defended his opinion with facts. Terr has not. Therefore Der Trihs’s opinion is more likely to be correct.
All opinions are not equal. When they don’t affect anyone else, wrong opinions can be ignored, but when they do, the wrong opinion is wrong.
It is very clear you do not equate abortion with murder. The way you treat people who have an abortion and the way you treat people who have murdered is different. Your actions betray your words.
I mean, you joined a message board full of murderers if you believe that abortion is murder. And yet you don’t come off as an immoral person. Yet moral people don’t tend to associate with murderers.
And until you’ll admit that you don’t see them as the same, people are going to keep guessing why you are unable to admit the truth.
Win.
No, the law doesn’t matter to the argument, but the argument about abortion derives from the law, including yours. I don’t see anyone arguing that a child can be aborted 5 minutes before delivery. Although maybe that’s the way you want it to be.
Yep. Making abortion illegal leads to back alley abortions which leads to dead women, who we all agree are human beings. (Well, maybe not some Republicans.)
Now, if you claim eight cell embryos are human beings, we need some more evidence than your say so. Otherwise you are begging the question.
Der Trihs’ “wrong opinion” affects the children being murdered in abortions.
The kids being aborted are not “eight cell embryos”.
Sure. Definitely when the embryo would be viable outside the mother - so no abortions a day before the due date. Carl Sagan thought the line should be when the fetus has measurable brain activity. I’m not sure I agree, but that is at least a reasonable position.
The position that an embryo becomes human upon fertilization would rule out non-surgical birth control methods stopping implantation, for example. So considering this case is definitely relevant.