Why elevate the legal status of the unborn above the born?

an extension of the mothers body cannot be a parasite, its part of her.

 

Didn't make up anything you said

Does this not mean that you do not believe the killing of a zygote is Murder ?

You said

- this means you are against law which ban's abortion .. as such law forces women to continue unwanted pregnancies.

 

The definition of parasite is living off another organism...The fetus is living off the mother for much of its life.

I believe more like you. For example, the fetus is the only organism which is a potential human.

 

I'm not sure what the viability of the fetus has to do with whether or not the woman has equal, inferior or superior rights compared to said fetus. And that makes this look strawman, since you are changing the premise of my argument. Can you show me how they are related?

That being said, the irony of your question is that I just told (on a different debate site altogether) another poster about how the viability point becomes earlier and earlier as technology progresses.

 

The point being that the mothers body grew the Ucord and fetus, it did not attach on its own accord, again cant legitimately be labelled a parasite any more than any other part of her body that grew as a normal human function like her toe or finger. sorry The idea of calling an embryo a parasite is frankly is preposterous.

 

Just because a tape-worm happens to be growing inside a woman's body - and is technically part of her .. does not mean the tape-worm it not a parasite.

 

It is not preposterous to label an unwanted growth inside of one's body a parasite..

 

even though its not a parasite, brilliant!

 

Sure it is a parasite. An unwanted Growth inside one's body .. and if you don't like that word .. how about an "Infection" were you thinking that would be a better word ?

 

The knowledge of the probability of pregnancy was known long before the bang session and she accepted the risk with the action, now you insist she has no liability for HER action. Tells us a nice story about your moral compass. Id bet you are an atheist?

 

The knowledge of probability of getting a parasite going into the Jungle .. doesn't change the fact that if you get infested by one ... its a parasite and you want to get rid of it.

Why would you think one needs religion to have a moral compass ? or that having religion necessarily gives one a good moral compass ? Such is nonsense.

You would lose your bet -- as I am not an Atheist .. nor am I ashamed of my religions beliefs as is likely the case with you - having expressed my beliefs numerous times .. but, glad you brought religion into the equation.

Tell me Koko .. when does the soul arrive - according to your religious belief - and why .. no need to be ashamed.

 

a parasite from the jungle is a foreign body that attaches not one your body grows, like your toe or the noodle between your legs.

A fetus is not an infestation, try looking up the words you use so you understand them before posting such foolishness

your moral compass IS your religion regardless of the beliefs you attach

define soul

 

Of course a fetus is an infestation Infestation is the state of being invaded or overrun by pests or parasites.[1] It can also refer to the actual organisms living on or within a host.[2]

Seems you are the one guilty of projecting your foolishness onto others. .. crying " try looking up words so you understand them before posting Foolishness" - when it is you who lacks understanding. Is the embryo not an organism living within a host ?

The soul is the "I Am" that part of you which realizes that you exist .. but of course might be defined different ways depending on one's religious belief

Does your religion not believe in a soul ? or are you too ashamed of your religious beliefs to answer the simple question put to you ..

When do you think the Soul arrives ? -- and Why.

 

Thanks for the cotation, its always entertaining to see you shoot yourself in the foot.

From your citation of course! :
Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one organism, the parasite, lives on or inside another organism, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.[1] The entomologist E. O. Wilson has characterised parasites as "predators that eat prey in units of less than one".[2] Parasites include single-celled protozoans such as the agents of malaria, sleeping sickness, and amoebic dysentery; animals such as hookworms, lice, mosquitoes, and vampire bats; fungi such as honey fungus and the agents of ringworm; and plants such as mistletoe, dodder, and the broomrapes. There are six major parasitic strategies of exploitation of animal hosts, namely parasitic castration, directly transmitted parasitism (by contact), trophically transmitted parasitism (by being eaten), vector-transmitted parasitism, parasitoidism, and micropredation.

Damn! Fetus isnt on the list!

So what species is a human female?
What species is a human fetus?
damn your position is truly the mark of brilliance!

If thats not clear enough, dont call me I'll call you

 

If the fetus is proven to be viable, the fetus is no longer just a possession of the mother for the mother to do with which she pleases.

 

That is not from my citation .. what a joke .. and big fat strawman. Regardless .. you still havn't answered when the Soul arrives .

 

It is using her body to sustain it's life...a parasite.

Now get over the idea that "parasite " is an insult and think "scientific term for an entity that lives off another".

 

Just because it says exactly the same thing not withstanding right!

Lets see your Scientific CITATION? lol
No 'scientist' is going to publish anything with that kind of stupidity attached to it.

 

So you think that a ZEF doesn't live off the woman it's in?

So how does it develop? How does it stay alive?

 

I gave you a definition .. you didn't like it and posted a bunch of stuff claiming that I posted it when I did not ... and then rage around talking about stupidity.

Who is the stupid one here posting falsehoods.

 

Calling folks stupid - when one has barely a clue about the biological science under discussion .. is kind of stupid if you ask me.

Parasitic Infection - Parasites are organisms that live in (or on) another organism, called the host. The parasites can be microscopic or large enough to see with the naked eye, and they survive by feeding from the host. They can also spread parasitic infections, which can lead to sepsis.https://www.sepsis.org/sepsisand/parasitic-infections/

Were only starting to have fun with you mate .. Lets see who is the stupid one and have some priceless fun.

 

The knowledge of the probability of broken bones was known long before the skiing session and she accepted the risk with the action. By your logic, she should not be allowed to fix the bones, and just allow them to heal naturally in whatever configuration they end up in.

 

The state certainly has an interest in the life of a baby in the womb.
If a pregnant woman is killed in an act of violence, the state will consider that two intentional deaths, not one death and a clump of cells.

 

I've never made a claim about the offspring being a possession. Closest I have ever come is noting that if the offspring is a possession then it is the possession of both the biological parents. I'm not agreeing that the "if" is true, only that under the assumption of it being true then the second part also is true.

But as to what your point is more likely to be, as technology moves the viability point further and further back, then yes, according to the RvW decision, the woman is no longer eligible for an abortion (assuming that abortion includes termination and not only removal). However, given that it then has viability and can be kept alive by technology, the woman can call for an induced labor to get it out of her body so that it is no longer violating her bodily autonomy. No law against that.

 

And yet the states specifically put into those laws that an abortion is not covered by such laws.