• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Heartbeat theory

gigabitdrew said:
This really does not need to be complicated.... and this answer should fit most situations...

Once they find a heartbeat then it is time to protect the child. If there is no heartbeat, then it is just organic material that has the hope of being a child.... just a little further along than an unfertilized egg.

OK... so it is hard to get around the whole life begins at conception... but besides that... it holds up nicely.
Click to expand...

So you would then have to claim that as long as a hospital could keep a person's heart beating, they can't turn off the machines. And since they now could put in artificial hearts, that means for decades, maybe centuries.
 
sangha said:
So a genetic twin is not a new unique human individual?
Click to expand...

The most radical pro-lifer m, than on the forum insists that "human" is NOT defined by species or dna. Rather if a woman wants to have an abortion she is a subhuman monster making the fetus as subhuman monster's offspring if allowed to be born.
 
Why "heartbeat?" Why not "wiggling finger?" "muscle spasm?" "Countable toes?" Why is "heartbeat" relevant to anything - other than another convenient slogan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom