• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is a fetus a human being?

Fantasea said:
What difference does this make? We are dealing with an unborn human child in an early stage of development. Its humanity is not at all dependent upon being able to pass a "test".

It will be further developed and larger at 26 weeks, but no more human than it is at 3 weeks.

Refute that, if you can.

Then what stops a sperm from being human?
 
vergiss said:
Then what stops a sperm from being human?

PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF YOUR SPERM!

CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSMAN OR SENATOR TODAY!
 
vergiss said:
Then what stops a sperm from being human?
23 "X" chromosomes.
 
Felicity said:
23 "X" chromosomes.

So it's to do with the chromosomes? So what about those people out there with genetic disorders which result in too few/too many chromosones. Aren't they human?
 
vergiss said:
So it's to do with the chromosomes? So what about those people out there with genetic disorders which result in too few/too many chromosones. Aren't they human?
You asked what made a sperm not human...it's missing some X chromosomes. too few and the conceptus won't survive--Too many CAN survive--depending...but ideally...23 "X" added to the sperm will make it HUMAN. Chromosomal abnormalities do not deny the human-ness of the conceptus. I was just giving the most brief answer.
 
What exactly is the purpose of this topic? What are we trying to prove here?
 
Felicity said:
You asked what made a sperm not human...it's missing some X chromosomes. too few and the conceptus won't survive--Too many CAN survive--depending...but ideally...23 "X" added to the sperm will make it HUMAN. Chromosomal abnormalities do not deny the human-ness of the conceptus. I was just giving the most brief answer.

Still no logic. So it's not human because it won't survive? Of course not. Neither will a week-old embryo if you were to remove it from the uterus.
 
vergiss said:
Still no logic. So it's not human because it won't survive? Of course not. Neither will a week-old embryo if you were to remove it from the uterus.
What difference does that make? None.
 
scottm123 said:
Some people think that just because a fetus hasn't developed past a certain point it is not fully a human so it is ok to destroy it.
No one should take abortion lightly ,but take care of your fetus and let others take care of theirs.
and mind your own affairs !
Would be a most logical approach .
Imposing your morals on others, dictating what you think is right or wrong based on an appraoch from one angle ,or another. Without looking at all the variables in the big picture
an approach that would send abortions under ground with clothshangers and other rusty utensils no thanks bubba
under certain circumstances abortions are a medical preceedure and a needed one
I am not an anti abortionist or an abortionist
but I dont impose my set of pricipals and morals on another
those that would like to do that whats the matter with you are you a comunist or facist
isnt america free or is freedom the right to limit others the way you see fit
according to your little bubble morality
 
Last edited:
Canuck said:
No one should take abortion lightly ,but take care of your fetus and let others take care of theirs.
and mind your own affairs !
Would be a most logical approach .
Imposing your morals on others, dictating what you think is right or wrong based on an appraoch from one angle ,or another. Without looking at all the variables in the big picture
an approach that would send abortions under ground with clothshangers and other rusty utensils no thanks bubba
under certain circumstances abortions are a medical preceedure and a needed one
I am not an anti abortionist or an abortionist
but I dont impose my set of pricipals and morals on another
those that would like to do that whats the matter with you are you a comunist or facist
isnt america free or is freedom the right to limit others the way you see fit
according to your little bubble morality
Ummmm....if an embryo is a person...you ARE imposing what you think is right and wrong on another....the embryo!

Also...civilized societies DO impose a set of principles on others...they are called LAWS.
 
Felicity said:
Ummmm....if an embryo is a person...you ARE imposing what you think is right and wrong on another....the embryo!

Also...civilized societies DO impose a set of principles on others...they are called LAWS.

Well, we obviously have no laws against aborting children... so...

STOP WHINING!
 
Caine said:
Well, we obviously have no laws against aborting children...!
Perhaps we're not as civilized as we would like to imagine...
 
Felicity said:
Perhaps we're not as civilized as we would like to imagine...

You tell me.... How is it any of your business if another woman decides she is not ready to be a mother yet?????
 
Caine said:
You tell me.... How is it any of your business if another woman decides she is not ready to be a mother yet?????
The same reason it's my right to say slavery is wrong and to fight against that. It's a human rights issue.
 
Felicity said:
The same reason it's my right to say slavery is wrong and to fight against that. It's a human rights issue.

Slavery has bee abolished in this country for a long time.
This is a person's right to choose.
 
Felicity said:
The same reason it's my right to say slavery is wrong and to fight against that. It's a human rights issue.

I agree. I'm against abortion except in cases of rape and incest.

As far as the argument of how the fetus isn't a child in the medical sense...the way I look at it is, the fetus WILL be a child. It's only a matter of time. So should we let time determine whether or not we will embrace something as a cherishable form of life?
 
George_Washington said:
I agree. I'm against abortion except in cases of rape and incest.

As far as the argument of how the fetus isn't a child in the medical sense...the way I look at it is, the fetus WILL be a child. It's only a matter of time. So should we let time determine whether or not we will embrace something as a cherishable form of life?

Again, thats like calling the eggs we eat chickens, reguardless of the fact that they aren't chickens yet.

So, I say that chicken eggs have rights! No more eating of eggs because you are eating a chicken actually, but being wasteful cause you can feed 2 more people with a chicken than with an egg!!!!

Call your Senator today!!!! Eggs have a right to hatch!
 
George_Washington said:
I agree. I'm against abortion except in cases of rape and incest.

As far as the argument of how the fetus isn't a child in the medical sense...the way I look at it is, the fetus WILL be a child. It's only a matter of time. So should we let time determine whether or not we will embrace something as a cherishable form of life?

I don't know anyone who is FOR abortion.
I don't see people running around saying, "EVERYONE SHOULD GET ABORTIONS!"

No, people support the right that women have to choose whether or not they are ready to be mothers or want to be mothers.
Abolish that right and you'll have an extreme increase in the crime rate, and a widening social economic gap.
 
Caine said:
Again, thats like calling the eggs we eat chickens, reguardless of the fact that they aren't chickens yet.

So, I say that chicken eggs have rights! No more eating of eggs because you are eating a chicken actually, but being wasteful cause you can feed 2 more people with a chicken than with an egg!!!!

Call your Senator today!!!! Eggs have a right to hatch!

But how can you actually compare a human baby to a chicken? That's just cruel and in human. I believe my theory holds weight, despite your counter claim.

I realize that women want to feel like they have control over their bodies and I respect that. Like I said, I would allow abortion in cases of rape out of compassion for the woman. But beyond that, I just can't see how the baby should be punished for something that the woman did. Nobody forced the woman to have sex in the first place. It's where personal responsiblity comes in. Why should the baby suffer for something the woman did? I mean if you want to use birth control pills, fine. I have no problem with that. If you enjoy having sex, fine again. I just don't like to see innocent people suffer.
 
George_Washington said:
But how can you actually compare a human baby to a chicken? That's just cruel and in human. I believe my theory holds weight, despite your counter claim.

I realize that women want to feel like they have control over their bodies and I respect that. Like I said, I would allow abortion in cases of rape out of compassion for the woman. But beyond that, I just can't see how the baby should be punished for something that the woman did. Nobody forced the woman to have sex in the first place. It's where personal responsiblity comes in. Why should the baby suffer for something the woman did? I mean if you want to use birth control pills, fine. I have no problem with that. If you enjoy having sex, fine again. I just don't like to see innocent people suffer.

How is this for a Baby being punished for its mothers mistake.
Crackhead/Heroine Addicted babies.....
If you took the right to Abort children away from women, they would be forced to have to carry out these pregnancies.... Are Crack Babies not being punished by thier mother's mistake by being born addicted to crack?
These children are better off dead, especially since most of them end up that way, or retarded, anyways.
 
Caine said:
How is this for a Baby being punished for its mothers mistake.
Crackhead/Heroine Addicted babies.....
If you took the right to Abort children away from women, they would be forced to have to carry out these pregnancies.... Are Crack Babies not being punished by thier mother's mistake by being born addicted to crack?
These children are better off dead, especially since most of them end up that way, or retarded, anyways.

I see what you mean but I'm sure there's ways we could get the baby off of crack. In those cases I would say it would be best to take the baby away from the mother and place it in a better home.
 
galenrox said:
ideally, but you then have to acknowledge that if a woman takes a pregnancy full term, then she's less likely to give the kid up, and thus the kid would be more likely to live in a terrible place for a child to live.

Well it doesn't matter how the mother feels. If she's truly unfit to raise the child, then I believe the State has a right to intervene.
 
George_Washington said:
Well it doesn't matter how the mother feels. If she's truly unfit to raise the child, then I believe the State has a right to intervene.

Or she has a right to abort the baby, and go on smoking crack until she dies and stops collecting welfare.
 
George_Washington said:
This goes back to my original point-why make the baby suffer for her actions?

Because the Baby would suffer more without the mother.
It can't survive without its mother, and im not speaking in terms of living in crazy scientifically designed places made to simulate everything the mother's womb has, I mean, its not like I forget to pull out and suddenly an egg falls out and can develop on its own without its mother.
Thats why, a fetus isnt a human being, its a fetus, thats why its called a fetus.
 
Back
Top Bottom