FoxHastings said: ↑ Well, a human fetus is human(adjective) ...it's just not A human being (noun) as in "legal person". Anything that is part of a human is human...what else could it be? Sperm from a human is human sperm. Eggs of a human are human.
Your post is a very profound truth, & I appreciate your voicing it. I am Pro-Choice, but have never been Pro-Abortion. I seriously doubt any woman is either, except in cases of rape or incest.
The best you're going to be able to attach that label to pro-choicers is to say that we are pro-abortion-access. Unlike the righteous-high-five(but unrealistic) labels that anti-abortionists like to give themselves, a pro-choice person tends to live up to the term in that they support the ability to choose abortion or birth. I doubt you'll find many who are pro-abortion in that they want abortions to happen. That's why the label I gave you is going to be closest to the truth and reality, without all the righteous back-patting that the term pro-life gives to those who live under it's umbrella.
Two questions: if you remove a week old fetus from the womb, can it survive on its own? Do you consider yourself pro-life?
How about you convince us that you are not a moron for asking the question "convince me that a human is not a human".
You'll have to admit there's room for disagreement on that, at least before viabililty. I'm not opposed to working to lower the number of abortions. But, I'm most definitely and totally against writing laws against women as a methodology. Our government is not NEARLY so good at addressing the full range of issues that it can be turned loose to dictate to women how much a woman owes the federal government on this issue.
It always seemed hypocritical that the same groups that opposed abortion also opposed sex education, birth control , the morning after pill, etc, etc. It is clear that the anti abortion people really oppose sex for any other reason than propagation. Either they are sick in the head or they are just envious.
What they really oppose is women having the same rights as everyone else. If they can rule on what the fetus is then they can rule women. Yes, they could be envious of people with healthy normal sex drives....especially the ones who think the answer is "simple ", humans should just stop having sex.
Well I think the bible gives man dominion over women. So if you belive the bible I guess you can tell women what to do with their bodies.
FoxHastings said: ↑ What they really oppose is women having the same rights as everyone else. If they can rule on what the fetus is then they can rule women. Yes, they could be envious of people with healthy normal sex drives....especially the ones who think the answer is "simple ", humans should just stop having sex. Do you? Yes, the bible thumpers just love to point out that even though they may be the lowliest scum on earth they still rule over women... It's a sick fairy tale but probably makes them feel all manlywanly…
Convince me you have the right to point the government’s gun at a woman’s head and demand she give birth or die.
You STILL haven't shown where someone said a human fetus isn't human. You STILL haven't proven that Planned Parenthood sold body parts. Pretty much a THREAD FAIL AS USUAL
No one has said this, but go off I guess. While this is true, I'd go one step further to say I'm pro-preventing the need for abortion to begin with. Namely, with proper education about and access to birth control and social programs so that a person who otherwise wants a child doesn't have to abort because of money or give the kid up for adoption if that's not what they want. I know that's not possible for every single pregnant person, especially in abusive or dangerous situations, but there's a whole lot more that even progressives could do in this area.
I agree with your post but progressives do try to make things better for women...it's the right that wants to cut funding to entities that support poor children like Welfare, SNAP, WIC, and even are against healthy school lunches..
I wouldn't say he isn't human, just that if the abortion is early enough, the being has no consciousness and so that individual can't be put on the same level than a human with his developped brain. Furthermore, abortion enable to regulate the population.
That is not what pro choice people say - unless they are really ignorant of both English and biology. 1) Learn the difference between the descriptive adjective use of the word "human" and the noun. You have mixed up the two. The term you are looking for is "a human" - the noun form. 2) Most on the pro choice side do not view abortion as desirable at all stages - you have lumped them all into one which is logical fallacy.
Once again you are wrong. Just because someone does not want to give the Gov't power to use physical violence (Law) to prevent a woman from having an abortion - does not mean they agree with abortion. One day - hopefully soon - you will realize the difference between 1) having a belief and 2) forcing that belief on others though physical violence. Belief in essential liberty is not belief in liberty "only for things you agree with" - everyone believes in that. Belief in essential liberty is belief in liberty for things you disagree with and/or do not like.
That's ridiculous. "Pro life" is a position which advocates every pregnancy be carried to term. So, "pro abortion" would be a position which would advocate that every pregnancy be terminated. No one has ever suggested that should happen. It's "pro choice", and it doesn't really matter if you like it or not...
Which is the already the current standard. "Late term abortion" that isn't medically necessary is a forced-birth fetishist myth.