FoxHastings said: ↑ Uh, duh, female animals also have sexual urges...and humans don't only do it because they want kids!! They do it because it's fun and pleasurable and healthy I'm sure your numbers are wrong but still elicit a big So What.
FoxHastings said: ↑ Fetuses have NO RIGHTS Well, that was an illogical conclusion to draw. Just because fetuses have protections doesn't mean they have rights.
"Many"? HOW many? Show stats!!! So thank goodness that when abortion became legal they became safer for women...I am so sure you are glad for them...RIGHT!!!! There are women who find, after a difficult pregnancy , that they can never have children again. But, it is still the woman's choice, her body, her choice.
Can you explain how assaulting a fetus can be done without assaulting the woman? See, the fetus is inside the woman....didn't you know that!??? WHICH part of YOUR body don't you own????
I guess women never had abortions until the devil introduced humanity to MTV, heavy metal and the CD-player ("ooh nooo, not the cd-player!").
As in, the abortion procedure would not be available within the health system. However, if an abortion was to take place outside of the health system, it would be perfectly legal.
The point is, there was zero control over the reproductive nature of sex. The motive may have been pleasure, but that didn't stop the almighty force of nature from taking its course! It still doesn't stop it! It's just now there is obviously way more control. And as such, the only reason sex for pleasure is as common as it is now is because of modern technology.
You make it sound as if women of today are just having abortions for fun on their "Friday-Girls-Night-Outs". There have been experiments with contraceptives for a long, long time.
Ask those who passed the laws ….but I suspect it had to do with placing more serious charges against a criminal who takes away a woman's right to choose (killing her fetus)… In abortion, the fetus was given protection after viability as a sop to the Anti-Choicers….it really is irrelevant ..
Yes, yes. People did not really enjoy sex until the pill was invented. ... Actually, I think this might be somewhat true. But, not for the reasons you may think. When the Church held a tight crip on society and told people having fun is a sin that will send you to hell, I am sure many couples were both afraid and ashamed of having sex.
I do admire the creativity. There is a food that decreases a womans desire for vaginal sex by 99%. Wedding cake!
No... it would simply define cats that have a heartbeat as "living" cats. Cats are not humans; we are talking specifically about humans. So, since you wish to reject the common medical definition of 'living', what would you propose to be the definition of 'living'? How would you propose determining whether or not one is 'alive'? Homo sapiens is the specific species that you and I are a part of. That IS based in science. If a 'human' is not of the homo sapien species, then what species do you suggest that 'human' is a part of?
Okay, so we've established that a fetus is alive. Now, what do you mean by "depends on who is carrying it"? Do you mean, say, which species is carrying it (as a fetus could refer to any mammal)? We are specifically talking about a human fetus, and by 'human', it is meant that the homo sapien species is being discussed. IOW, the fetus belongs to the homo sapien species. Are we good thus far?
Cats are not human, neither are fetuses. That is not the "common medical definition of living" at all. As I have already pointed out more than once, there are plenty of life forms that do not have a heartbeat. Not all living things have rights. I thought God created man from clay and woman from man's rib. What does this have to do with anything?
Aha. Yes. You do not have to keep using the term "homo sapiens" to pretend as if your argument has anything to do with science. We all know your whole case against abortion is based on blind faith in a deity.
How do you suggest determining whether or not a human is alive? Medical professionals make use of the presence of one's heartbeat for making such a determination. How do you suggest defining 'human'? Science considers this to be "of the homo sapien species".