At 6 weeks in; when the fetal cells specialize.
Exactly. At what point does a baby stop becoming the property of the mother?
Right. This was kind of a "how long has it been since you stopped beating your wife" type of question of course.Just making it clear that the premise of a woman's choice is that she can do whatever she wants to her private property.
Why does cell specialization justify coercing its mother to gestate a fetus (a manifestation of prohibiting abortion)?
Why is a zygote not human despite its having a human genome?
How is selecting these divisions of human development in which to sanction or prohibit abortion not merely arbitrary?
If you don't like abortions, don't have one
I care about mother lives as well.
And yeah, in a better society abortions don't need to exist because life can be sustained through machinery as well as that foster care is better. If those right-wing assholes care at least a little more about foster care instead of bluffing their bills on banning abortion the world will be much better.
15 days later
Because a fetus with specialized cells is a human being.
Because it resembles cancer if the cells aren't specialized.
Because cell specialization isn't arbitrary. It's when you become a human.
To a degree notable enough not to dismiss out of hand, many of our morals stem from our innate instincts to survive as a fit species; the same instincts written into the DNA of all life on the planet.Promoting the moral advocating ownership and removal of cancer makes the Human species fitter for survival.Promoting the moral advocating ownership and removal of fetuses may or may not make the Human species fitter for survival. Do we need more babies in the world? Or is 7 billion people (4 million a year in the USA) barely enough to ensure the continued existence of the human species?Our Darwinian instincts may actually be working against what we might perceive to be "moral" if the end result is that the species becomes less fit due to overpopulation.
Is "overpopulation" really a concern when the Earth's populace can fit in Texas? Or in the advent of synthetic foods?
Maybe or maybe not, but the perceptions are the triggers that spur our evolutionary DNA instincts.
Obviously, Malthus was wrong before and he may still be wrong today.
Why be so hurried for a wrong decision to be made ?
Its phase denotes a reproducible phenomena in all human development
But the cells aren't specialized at 3 weeks into pregnency, so it would be like a cancer cell.
I've changed my mind for some reason to being pro choice up until 20 weeks of pregnency. The reason for this is the vast majority of pro lifers don't adopt and there are many kids that are orphans that die due to hunger. This should be a meme:
600,000 fetuses die due to abortion per year, most of which die by a painless way since they can't feel pain and everyone loses their minds.Over 10,000,000 children die to hunger per year, all of which die by a painful way and no one bats an eye.
If pro lifers wish to be consistent, they would save one of these kids from hunger. Instead, the most famous pro life organization, the Catholic church spends their money protecting priests who violated their vow of chastity by raping little boys. They need to fix their priorities.
12 days later
First: why 20 weeks?
Second: the vast majority of pro-lifers argue the better use of discretion before having sex
Kill 600,000 to save 10,000,000? I don't believe the math operates that way.
Millions die from hunger all around the world. Do you donate your time and money to feeding them? Have you adopted as many children as you can financially support? And in your choice not to do so, are you responsible for their deaths?
That's when the fetus can feel pain.
The vast majority of pro lifers claim that if you don't want children, don't have sex, yet only 3% of the US population waits until marriage, so the vast majority of these people are hypocrites.
The democrats advocate contraception use for people wanting to have sex and unwilling to concieve.
But pro lifers instead advocate for abstinence only education, which the stats show is counterproductive to reducing abortions.
So, then why don't pro lifers adopt kids if they are so concerned about life?
I'm not responsible for their deaths; I just didn't feel like saving them. Just as people shouldn't be forced to save a kid from hunger, people shouldn't be forced to bring a kid into the world.Thoughts?
I'm pro-choice, very pro-choice
