Baby bird, really so different from a "fetus"?

Watch this video of a mother parakeet with her offspring
https://www.tiktok.com/@mobudgietik/video/7268685513958214917

If that were a human mother, a lot of people would be saying "It's just a fetus"

But what is the big difference between a fetus and that baby bird we see the mother bird lovingly playing with in this video?

That baby bird you are seeing in this video is probably only 4 weeks old.
(That's from the time of fertilisation)

 

Are you seriously asking such a stupid question?

 

Unfortunately yes
I gather eggs are now off someone’s menu

 

The OP cannot tell the DIFFERENCE between FEEDING and PLAYING?

Seriously?

The OP cannot tell the DIFFERENCE between a FETUS and a HATCHLING either?

Seriously?

The OP cannot tell the DIFFERENCE between an ABORTION and eggs HATCHING?

The OP is NOT serious!

This a yet another EXAMPLE of the kind of IGNORANT Xtofascist DISINFORMATION that is POLLUTING our nation.

Sad!

 

Just further proof that Progressives seem to hold more emotional sympathy for animals than humans?

 

Okay. So you're saying this is not actually about gestational stage of development, but rather just has to do with whether it is inside a womb or not.

We've addressed that in another thread.

Pro-choicers are so funny. If I put up an argument about gestational development, they say that doesn't matter because it's in a womb, so they win the argument, so they believe. But then if I bring up an argument about whether being in a womb matters, then they say that doesn't matter, the issue is all about gestational development. So they "win" the argument again.
Except you people are just lying to yourselves.

Seems pro-choicers can't win any single argument so they are always trying to switch it up and change it.

In argumentative debate, I believe that is called "clouding the issue". Unable to stick to any single argument and defend it.

 

/shakes head sadly...walks away

 

You seem to know you can't win the gestational development argument in this thread.

Go ahead, try. Argue that baby bird is "not fully developed" and is undeserving of life in the same way that mother bird is.

 

I'm sure this was a joke, but this seems like an ignorant comment.
Obviously the eggs that people normally eat are unfertilized -- there was no conception.
A male rooster is not needed for hens to produce eggs, and indeed they have to keep roosters away from hens if the eggs that are collected are going to be eaten by humans.

I shouldn't have to explain this but am afraid that I have to, since many modern people are completely detached from farm life and have no idea where their food comes from. The eggs you buy at the supermarket will never hatch, and contain 100% identical DNA to the female hen that laid them.

 

No they wouldn't, they'd say it's a new-born. Birds gestate inside the egg and hatching is essentially the equivalent of birth in (most) mammals. That chick was a fetus prior to hatching, just a mammalian young are fetuses until birth.

 

Ew, I don't find baby birds cute. Not even the loving music could make that baby bird with its mother vomiting in its mouth cute. But more seriously, I am under the impression that this baby bird is a conscious, feeling being. I cannot say the same for embryos at the time most abortions occur. So that's why the baby bird "deserves" more sympathy than the embryo/early fetus. And also don't compare gestational ages between different species, they are not comparable.

 

Yes, the egg industry uses chickens to lay unfertilized eggs. What do you think the egg industry does to male chicks because they are useless to them? Male chicks are routinely gassed, asphyxiated, electrocuted or sent down a conveyer belt to be ground up. The humane society claimed in 2020 that 300 million male baby chicks were ‘culled’ in the USA in one year. How about you have some outrage about these poor live chicks being routinely murdered just for being a male.

As far as your claim that supermarket eggs will never hatch — surprise, surprise — a teenager hatched an egg bought in a supermarket — https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...bator-his-name-sutton-coldfield-a8785821.html

 

But it's okay to do that when the offspring is human?

Let's think about this.

Do you think baby chicks should have fewer rights than adult chickens? I mean, if there did exist a reason to give chickens certain types of rights (like maybe the right to be treated humanely), would that argument be a much weaker one for baby chicks that had just hatched?

Maybe there are some horrific medical experiments that you think would be okay to do on baby chicks but would be too inhumane and cruel for adult chickens?

 

But then you're making the argument all about whether it is inside or outside of the womb, and NOT an issue of gestational development.

You see how those are two very different arguments and issues.

 

Can we agree the mother bird appears to be "playfully feeding"?

I personally don't find human babies cute. As far as I'm concerned they're disgusting space aliens. But that is neither here nor there and is besides the point.

I guess you think only people who are attractive deserve to live. (hope you can spot the sarcasm)

 

I have no issue with abortion up until 20 weeks. You may not understand why I feel this way and why many feel this way. I have an issue with women being forced to give birth and not having control over their own bodies. I have an issue with the fact children are being forced to have babies after being raped. I have an issue with a woman being forced to carry a fetus to term when the fetus has no skull. The male chicks that are ‘culled’ are hatched. If newborn males were being murdered just for being male via gassing, electrocution, etc etc, of course that would not be okay.

 

Birds will abandon their nest and their young. I have raised several wild birds over the years.

 

Human mothers sometimes do it too. Many years ago a woman in my city dumped her baby over a bridge into the creek. The story made a small appearance in the local newspapers.
That was the only serious crime or homicide in the city within a 10 year span of time.

 

one can't force rape victims to have their rapists babies, it's the women's body, the women's choice... or as in recent cases where the right forced a child to have their rapists baby.... it should be the child's choice to have the baby or not

 

at 4 weeks, a human fetus is not a person yet

http://www.slate.com/id/2120872/
"a member of President Bush's Council on Bioethics, describes in his book The Ethical Brain, current neurology suggests that a fetus doesn't possess enough neural structure to harbor consciousness until about 26 weeks, when it first seems to react to pain. Before that, the fetal neural structure is about as sophisticated as that of a sea slug and its EEG as flat and unorganized as that of someone brain-dead."

 

Errrrrr not always are they “unfertilised”. Anyone who lives on a farm will tell you that plus most commercial egg processors will “candle” eggs to ensure they are not fertilised prior to sale and guess what happens to those that are?

Even in the best run chock yards there will be an occasional “Randy Rooster”

 

One can if there's already a baby in there, and she didn't get the abortion early enough, for whatever reason.
This is so typical from you, FreshAir. When you can't think of anything to counter the specific argument, you try injecting the hot button issue of rape.

I think you well know the argument in this thread is one of gestational development, or comparative development, to be a little more specific. So, let's talk about that.
No more trying to change the topic from you.

 

So is that baby chick in the video not a parakeet yet?

Let's try to be consistent here.

Or at least offer up an explanation why you think it would be otherwise.

 

different animals take different amounts of time to be born, humans take about 9 months before they take their first breath of life

 

That's true.
But I think the real question is do they develop at a different rate.

Obviously bigger species typically require more time to develop because they are bigger. If nature isn't planning on sending them out of the womb (or egg) early, then there's no rush to make sure specific vital organs (primarily lungs) are functional. Nature usually holds them in gestation longer so they will be a bigger size when they come out. (For example, elephant gestation can be up to 22 months, giraffes are 15 months)