ba·by ˈbābē/ noun noun: baby; plural noun: babies 1. a very young child, especially one newly or recently born. "his wife's just had a baby" synonyms: infant, newborn, child, tot, little one; More informalrug rat; bairn; literarybabe, babe in arms, suckling; papoose; technicalneonate "a newborn baby" a young or newly born animal. the youngest member of a family or group. "Clara was the baby of the family" a timid or childish person. "“Don't be such a baby!” she said witheringly" synonyms: sissy, wimp, wuss, milquetoast; pantywaist "don't be such a baby" informal one's particular responsibility, achievement, or concern. noun: one's baby; plural noun: one's babies "“This is your baby, Gerry,” she said, handing him the brief" 2. informal a young woman or a person with whom one is having a romantic relationship (often as a form of address). "my baby left me for another guy" a thing regarded with affection or familiarity. "this baby can reach speeds of 140 mph" adjective adjective: baby 1. comparatively small or immature of its kind. "a baby grand piano" synonyms: miniature, mini, little, small, small-scale, scaled-down, toy, pocket, vest-pocket, midget, dwarf; More informalteeny, teeny-weeny, teensy, teensy-weensy, itsy-bitsy, itty-bitty, little-bitty, bite-sized "baby carrots" antonyms: large (of vegetables) picked before reaching their usual size. "baby carrots" verb verb: baby; 3rd person present: babies; past tense: babied; past participle: babied; gerund or present participle: babying 1. treat (someone) as a baby; pamper or be overprotective toward. "her aunt babied her and fussed over her clothes" synonyms: pamper, mollycoddle, spoil, cosset, coddle, indulge, overindulge, nanny, pander to "her aunt babied her" I'm sure you can find a definition that makes your statement accurate.....please do.
Curious... If the baby wasn't a baby in the womb seconds before birth, and it is recognized as one seconds after, what was it seconds before? In the womb seconds before birth, a fully formed fetus is still a fetus, but then seconds after birth that fully formed fetus is now a newborn baby... ...even though before birth the fully formed fetus shared the same characteristics as the newborn baby. Does this make any sense to any of you? At all? This is the pro-choice argument.
Well according to people on your side of the aisle, they can... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...or-dramatic-divorce-wife-took-FOUR-YEARS.html
FoxHastings said: ↑ YUP, it still is because it's STILL the woman who gets pregnant ... Oh, gee, so glad you could make the connection between sperm and pregnancy .....but I bet you can't say what difference it makes to the post of mine you quoted..... Did it change it somehow?? No, it didn't.
No, Democrats do not think men can get pregnant..........you have no proof of that as with all of your statements. From YOUR link : ""Beatie, 42, was born a girl but started hormone treatment at 23 to become a man, but decided to keep his reproductive organs""""
I see biology is something new for you ? Did you really think that a fetus grows inside of a woman completely UNATTACHED to her?!!!! OH MY GAWD!... No, it is attached and NOTHING you can say will ever change that BIRTH, look up the word, means a fetus becomes separated from the woman and no longer needs it's connections to her to survive. The fetus doesn't just float around inside her for 9 months unconnected and then slides out completely unattached !!!!! LOL! MYGAWD, haven't you even heard of an umbilical cord?? That severance of that connection is what constitutes birth, there are BIG differences to the fetus when it's born.
You know, Fox, your snark and sarcasm are showing how badly you are doing in this debate. So, let me address something with you. First, you ask a question and presume an answer. You don't even wait for one: No, I have heard of an umbilical cord before, I'm sure I was attached to one myself. The moment labor comes, the woman's body is saying that fetus is no longer a part of her body. Her body prepares for birth a months before birth takes place. But even then, you still think the fetus is a part of the woman. The processes that take place only show that the fetus is meant to be separate from the body even while inside. If the unborn child were truly a part of the woman's body, it would never be born, simply remaining as a parasite to leech off of the woman's bodily resources. And furthermore, according to that logic the human race would cease to exist. The woman functioned perfectly before conception, and continues to after birth (presuming she is in good health). If the fetus were truly part of her body, her body would be drastically altered by the process. Considerably. Second and lastly... No. If the baby moments before birth has the same characteristics as moments after, that means it was a baby before. Your logic is flawed.
Seems there's a lack of knowledge of biology , of what happens during pregnancy and child birth. WHO do you think is on the other end of the umbilical cord ? You think it just is attached to the fetus? If the fetus is not connected to the woman in any way please DO tell WHY she has to carry it around for 9 months. When a person turns 21 and becomes an adult their looks don't change. When a fetus becomes a baby it does change, even if it looks about the same, there are many physiological/physical changes as it goes from one stage of life, fetal, to the next stage, a baby......just like the teen went from one stage to the next.... ...but you don't seem to believe in science so explaining certainly wouldn't do any good.. But the FACT is no matter what YOU think , it isn't a person with rights until birth Hey , found any more "MEN" who got pregnant ????!!
Interesting... but even our most primitive ancestors treated the unborn with more reverence than you pro choicers do. I mean seriously, they recognized the importance of new life. Casually killing the unborn is detrimental to the perpetuation of a species. And as I said earlier in this thread, science backs my argument. ABSTRACT: The predominance of human biological research confirms that human life begins at conception—fertilization. At fertilization, the human being emerges as a whole, genetically distinct, individuated zygotic living human organism, a member of the species Homo sapiens, needing only the proper environment in order to grow and develop. The difference between the individual in its adult stage and in its zygotic stage is one of form, not nature. This statement focuses on the scientific evidence of when an individual human life begins. https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/life-issues/when-human-life-begins Were the law to follow science, then we would be giving unborn children the right to live. Your premise is based on the law, mine is based in science. The fact remains that science trumps the laws of men when it comes to the definition of what is or isn't human life. Even so, there are these laws already on the books, passed and signed in 2004: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1841 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/919a [from the second link] (d) In this section, the term “unborn child” means a child in utero, and the term “child in utero” or “child, who is in utero” means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.
FoxHastings said: ↑ If the fetus is not connected to the woman in any way please DO tell WHY she has to carry it around for 9 months. I didn't say her body wanted to expel it, I'm talking about a pregnant woman and you were too until you found you had no answer to the post above and went off on this red herring. WHY can't you explain If the fetus is not connected to the woman in any way please DO tell WHY she has to carry it around for 9 months..
You: ""The fact remains that science trumps the laws of men when it comes to the definition of what is or isn't human life" It doesn't matter.....the law doesn't deny that a fetus is human life....where did you get that stupid idea? Funny how you use science but don't believe in it...you won't even acknowledge that a fetus is connected to the woman it's in!! HEY, found any more PREGNANT MEN yet ????
If a poor family, who could only find shelter in a stable with their newborn, asked them for aid, they'd refuse.
It's called a stage of development. One second you are a child and then one second you are an adult too
Nobody has the right to murder a child. Murdering a child is illegal. A woman has the right to abort regardless of her marital status or how the pregnancy happened. BTW, you do realise that most women work, right? We are no longer being financially supported by men. We pull our own weight.
You couldn't address: Care to explain why you think a man, because he got a woman pregnant, should be able to tell her to either have the kid or abort it.???? THAT is what "having a say" means !!!!!!!
Are you seriously saying it's not connected to the woman? WTF do you think the umbilical cord is/does?
