A fetus cannot survive on it's own.

I did not say that the child should be aborted if it is the product of rape, I said that I considered that understandable.

Why is a fetus a child? After a certain stage of development, yes it is (or thereabouts) and as such there should be a cut-off point for abortions. Before that stage however, why is the fetus a child? You have no qualms about 'squashing a zygote'.

No it cannot. As raytri said, there has to be a compromise.

If what I suggested will not solve the problem, what will?

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

The fact that it cannot survive on it's own does not mean it is not a person. The fact that it cannot survive on it's own does not mean it is the property of the mother.

The exact same argument could be made for a 1 day old newborn. It cant survive on it's own either. Is it ok for the mother to kill it?

Should it be allowed or not?

It thinks and feels.

If it is not a child, does that make it property?

How do you define when that stage is?

I have already explained in detail where I draw the line and why.

You would never compromise with someone who wanted to legalize slavery, even in the smallest degree. Why is this different?

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

No. I am not implying anything, I am simply stating that a fetus cannot survive independently.

Yes. But it all should be presented and made easily available.


No. I just wanted to know why you considered a fetus a child.

It is the stage when the fetus develops from an embryo into a conscious being.


Where? If you have, I have not read it.


So you believe banning it completely will solve the situation?

You have compromised with pro-choicer's. You have already said that abortion is acceptable when the Mother's life is a t risk. Therefore, yours is a poor analogy.

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

If you are not implying anything, then please explain to me how that fact is relevant to whether or not the mother should be allowed to kill it.

So if the fetus IS a person, it is only a person if it is not the product of rape. Is that your logic?

How do you tell a conscious being fron a non-conscious being?

Here - http://www.politicalforum.com/viewto...ctivity#196767 - I go into detail in responses to that post further in teh thread.

The alternative is worse. My solution is simply to apply the same laws we have now with regards to other people. Treat it as a person, and not an object. Dont draw a distinction. That is my solution.

If you say so. I dont agree. Either way, my solution above would still address that.

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

That's true, but a person in a coma wouldn't have any awareness of being killed. If you kill a zygote, you take away all of its future consciousness, just as you take away all future consciousness by killing someone at a later stage in development. This is what matters to me about a zygote: 1. Is it human? 2. Is it living? 3. Is it genetically distinct from the mother? If the answer is yes to all three questions (and it is), then a zygote is a person and so may not be killed without ethically negating everyone's right to life.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

It is not relevant to this debate and there is no reason for us to continue to discuss it. When I said 'the child/fetus can't control it's own body' it was simply a response to you posting this:

No. My beliefs on abortion are pretty much along these lines:


Pretty much the same way you do.

Thank you.


The alternative being?

Banning it completely will do more harm than good. Abortion should be legal, but it should be seen as the absolute last option. That is done through education.

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

...at least as far as you can tell.

We know there is brain activity. Therefore I would choose to err on the side of caution.

You could say the same thing about the millions of sperm wasted every time someone masterbates. We cant base rights on what it might become. Only what it is right now.

That is insufficient for me. A zygote is not equal toa newborn child.

The existence of brain activity?

I dont want to put words in your mouth. That is why I am asking you to elaborate.

What we have now; treating the fetus like property that can be disposed of by the mother if she see's fit.

To who? Not much more harm you can do than death....thats about as bad as harm gets.

Banning it will result in fewer deaths. That doesnt sound like harm to me.

Can we make the same argument for slavery? "It is only ok as an absolute last option".

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

Yes. As I said I define consciousness the same way you do. Or at least the same way you have described in this thread.

No, banning will result in just as many, if not more deaths. Instead of going to a hospital to get an abortion, women will get abortions done on the street and by unprofessionals, thus putting them in grave danger.

Slavery and abortion are two entirely different things.

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

What's funny is that I consider myself pro-choice, yet I'm fine with a line drawn around viability or consciousness. Sad-Sav considers himself pro-life, yet he's fine with the same line.

It would be interesting to see a survey of "pro-choice" and "pro-life" people and divide them into categories based on where they draw the line: Life begins at conception, viability, any time up until birth, etc.

I suspect you'd find a tiny, tiny minority arguing "any time, for any reason." You'd also find a larger but still small minority arguing "life begins at conception." The vast majority of people would, quite sensibly, be somewhere in the middle.

So tell me again why we're still fighting over this?

__________________
Man up.

I'm fine with it until a certain point. Most folks are. Yet the debate rages on......

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.