There is no Baby at 3 weeks - so how can something that does not exist develop anything Anti-Aborts can not seem to spout anything but fallacy in support of claim... Your post contains 2 - the aforementioned assumed premise fallacy .. followed by the obviously false claim "Life should be protected" Sorry for the wake up call but - Humans must kill life in order to live.
No, no one is. It's now at 24 weeks......later if the life/health of women and/or fetus is in danger.. Aaaahhh, so many unanswered posts …
quit trying to lump all pro choicer's into one basket - opening with a generalization fallacy is so unnecessary. I have stated my opinion to you numerous times .. after sentience - I consider a living human to exist ..around 22 weeks - many are fighting for long after that - but not that many .. the consensus of subject matter experts is sentience - and this is for many reasons. One thing you often fail to do - is distinguish between the moral fight and the legal fight. You do not seem to get this distinction. So when I say 22weeks .. this my moral position . I personally think abortion is wrong after this point - that a living human exists - and that the soul has arrived - from a religious perspective. Perfect Harmony. This does not mean however - that I would favor abortion law - after this point .. and it doesn't mean that I don't. Law is a different question. There is a difference between A) Having a belief and B) forcing that belief on others through physical violence (Law) So what I am saying .. is that making law .. requires me to have met both justifications .. both morally - and meeting the high bar of being able to justify physical violence to force another human to go along with those beliefs. So .. in the case of the woman who is pregnant - and wants to have an abortion - .. If you are willing to put gun to head of the woman .. and tell her . comply or I pull the trigger .. and if she does not comply - you pull the trigger .. then you are not in contradiction. and remember the Golden Rule - Don't do to others what you hate. So - if you don't want big bob the Sodomizer coming around your house - .. trying to force a large object through a rather small orifice - perhaps you should not be forcing this on others .. Law is more complicated .....
so then, you should refrain from commenting. Where is breathing set as a requirement for an entity being a human being. Clearly a child in utero is a human being. One has to engage in extreme mental contortions to claim otherwise.
So an individual’s opinion based on whether or not the entity looks like a human being is the deciding factor. That is ignorant. Any stage of human development involves a human being!
I should refrain from commenting because I corrected another posters incorrect statement? Breathing was a metric they added. I never said a child in utero was not a human being... Do you often join conversations with only strawmen arguments or are you trying out a new debate strategy? At least your avatar is accurate
You illustrate this ignorance perfectly. You say a human fetus is a mouse. I say a human fetus is a human being. I am comfortable with leaving it right there.
The picture I posted is literally a mouse fetus. Do a reverse search. You are embarrassing yourself. It was meant to prove a point but you not only missed it you doubled down — impressive
Well you cannot show where I said your photo was anything. Because any photo you post is irrelevant. Is a mouse embryo a mouse? Yes. Checkmate!
Until it is born it is potential only. Why do I say that? Simply because there is no certainty that the mouse foetus will be born. It exists in potentio. Once it is born then it becomes an actual one
I believe in the Creator of Heaven and earth. My relationship to the world is taken from that perspective. Sinners all, yes however believe that all sins are forgivable (save blaspheming the H.S. per J.C.). Children and other innocents have been sacrificed throughout the ages. Nothing new under the sun even in this "enlightened/woke" age, newborn babies/infants/children were sacrificed on altars of named demons/gods of old, today they are sacrificed on the altar of convenience/my right/irresponsibility/fear/selfishness etc. only change is in what we now call the sacrificial altar (really still the same old folks). There are so many victims in every abortion.
No. This is not how it works. You cannot make a blurry claim and just defend it with "that's undeniable". How is it undeniable? A sacrifice is when you give up something you value more for something you value less. A woman who has an abortion does not do this at all. She gives up something that for her, at the given time, is undesirable (motherhood) for something she wants more (childlessness). Your definition of "sacrifice" is skewed and calling a zygote a "child" is just plain wrong. Abortion is abortion and child sacrifice is child sacrifice.
How shocking that the Anti-Life Anti-Abortionist is a believer... Not. Doesn't your Book say they are born with sin? How do they become innocent all of a sudden? Ah, the Christian does not believe in Individual Rights, how shocking... Not. Selfishness is great, btw. If only more people were selfish, the world would be a better place. It really is a shame that most people (believers and non-believrrs alike) are a bunch of altruistic second-handers.
Her lifestyle and her sex life is the only thing that is relevant in the equation. A fetus is not a life and thus, by definition, cannot have neither lifestyle nor sex life. It is really bizarre to demand unwillingly pregnant women should sacrifice life for non-life and then say it is the woman who is evil. No, they could not because demons are not real. Everyone is the author of their own actions. People who want the woman to sacrifice her actual life for a potential life are the devil, I agree. Furthermore, it is not a child until it has been born. You are not very good with concepts, are you? She did nothing wrong and it was de facto a good decision.
The only extreme mental contortion here is thinking that the above circular premise is not laughable nonsense. We all know a child is a human being .. your mission - should you choose to accept it - is to support your claim that a Child exists at the zygote stage - something you have continuously failed to do... and engaged in extreme mental contortions to avoid arguments contrary to your unsupported claim..
