Abortion: The Facts

I never claimed a fertilized egg was a human being. Nowhere in the discussion was there a mention of "Human Cells" developing by themselves. A pregnancy is a living developing human being, an abortion terminates that life.

 

Nazis didn't classify Jews as people.

 

No...a Pregnancy is the development and gestation of a FETUS.

The term HUMAN BEING does not apply until the Fetus is birthed and survives with or without mechanical aid.

This has been determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.

AboveAlpha

- - - Updated - - -

And the U.S. Supreme Court does not classify a Fetus as a Human Being.

And rightly so.

AboveAlpha

 

Spoken like Goebbels himself.

 

Really?

THAT...is how you logically debate?

Grow up.

AboveAlpha

 

Dude, you state for a fact that a group of humans aren't actually "people" because some authority figure told you so, therefore their lives can be ended.. There is no greater historical example for your argument than Joseph Goebbels. It was his life's work to do just that.

 

You and I both know that what you infer has absolutely NOTHING to do with this issue.

AboveAlpha

 

OK you want to talk what 'could' happen?

Side effects of Abortion:


Heavy or persistent bleeding
Infection or sepsis
Damage to the cervix
Scarring of the uterine lining
Perforation of the uterus
Damage to other organs
Death

Abdominal pain, cramping, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea spotting and bleeding, foul-smelling discharge, severe back pain, fever above 100.4F........

But it is ASSURED that 100% of the time there will be a dead developing human being that she would have called her 'baby'

 

No one want's to see Abortions taking place but they are necessary in many cases.

We should be concentrating upon education specific to Plan B and Morning After use which simply does not allow a Fertilized Egg Cell to implant itself in the Uterine wall thus completely iliminating the possibility of a future abortion.

AboveAlpha

 

I inferred nothing. The argument is that an authority figure determined a group of humans weren't people, therefore not subject to protection. Which argument, pro choice, or nazism, doesn't fit this description? I can't wait to hear this.

 

You are using the least likely to make your argument. The overwhelming data shows that when a woman gets pregnant, she will EXPECT to have a baby. Unless, of course, she gets an abortion. So...The EXPECTATION for a pregnant woman is to create a whole human being.

In fact, it is so EXPECTED that a pregnant woman will (if not aborted, etc.) will deliver a HUMAN BABY. (human being) We even have a word for it...we say she's EXPECTING.

 

I was not using "least likely" to make any argument. My argument holds true regardless of the future outcome.

There is no "developing human being" unless a human being exists. The zygote develops into a human being. It is not a developing human being.

A child develops into an adult. A child is not a developing adult. One needs first be an adult to be a developing adult.

If you wish to claim " a zygote is a living human" then show why this statement is true with something other than fallacy.

Your previous argument assumes the premise and this is fallacy. Your claim is essentially "A zygote is a living human because its a living human"

Repeating a claim is not proof of claim.

 

But the side effects of abortion are LESS LIKELY percentage wise to happen.

Yes, 100% of the time there will be a dead fetus...that's what abortion does.....what she called it if it had come to term proves nothing.


Tell ya what, why don't you invite all the women you know over to your house, your mother, sisters, daughters , wife, aunts, neighbors, any who have given birth.

Then, face to face, explain to them that all the side effects they had from their pregnancies was all in their heads, it didn't really happen.

Tell them if they get pregnant again they do not have to see a doctor because doctors are making up fake problems with their pregnancies in a Giant Scary Conspiracy to get them to have abortions .

See how that works out for ya......... Let me know the results.

 

""""argument is that an authority figure determined a group of humans weren't people""""....and you want YOUR personal authority figure to determine that women aren't people.


Go ahead and have a fetus declared a "person"......OK, the pregnant woman then has every right to protect herself from another "person" causing her injury just like you do.

 

Fetuses don't cause injury. Pregnancy does, which is caused by sex. It's a humorous argument though. A Fetus injuring someone... lol.

 

So Fugazi's posts were too deep for you.......so PROVE scientifically/biologically the fetus causes no harm to the woman.

 

Good to see you admit pregnancy causes injury..........why is it called pregnancy, doesn't that have something to do with a fetus . The fact that there is a fetus means pregnancy. And women have a right to protect themselves from injury no matter what you call it....

 

You actually just quoted a post where I address this in the "Abortion the facts" thread. Ironically it wasn't to answer it, but just to demand I address an earlier post. Anyway, I'll not be repeating myself.

 

No, you never proved that a fetus doesn't cause harm to a woman.........just saying you did doesn't cut the mustard.....

 

We have consistantly seen that "pro-lifers" fall into two categories-

1. Dishonest

2. Misogynistic


The ones in Group #1 being easily revealed if you can pin them down and get them to answer a few simple, logical questions. (Difficult since even they know they are inconsistant...and thus they try to dodge and deflect and change the subject)

Group #2 should atleast be praised for their honesty and consistancy. While Group #1 pretends Group #2 "doesn't exist, they're made up by paranoid pro-choicers". (which simply again shows that Group #1 are dishonest)

- - - Updated - - -

"Football players don't cause injuries on the field. Football games do."

 

I never said it either. Man you are thick.

 

The fetus doesn't cause the harm anymore than the football does. The players, in this example, would be mom and dad.

 

You said "Fetuses don't harm women, pregnancy does." How in the HELL do you "differentiate" those two things???

 

You noticed that, too......I think someone with no real facts or a decent argument is playing games hoping to hide that they have nothing....

 

Please show your scientific proof that a fetus doesn't cause a woman harm....