• 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!

Is This A Human Being?

I don't know. At that stage its difficult to tell by appearance alone.

At any rate it's not a question of looks. It's a question of biology. Biology says that a human beings life begins at conception. So you tell me if that's, in fact, a human being or not.
This is not 'biology', though, it's a moral sentiment about value, confused for a biological 'fact'.

Why - or, more exactly, how so? Because sperm and ova are also definitionally human, and living, but they are excluded from 'being' and therefore valorization.
 
This is not 'biology', though, it's a moral sentiment about value, confused for a biological 'fact'.

It's definitely biology. Only biological human beings are entitled to human rights. If the unborn aren't human beings, kill them to your heart's content.

Why - or, more exactly, how so? Because sperm and ova are also definitionally human, and living, but they are excluded from 'being' and therefore valorization.

They are not human beings. They are individual cells, like blood cells or neurons.
 
It's definitely biology. Only biological human beings are entitled to human rights. If the unborn aren't human beings, kill them to your heart's content.



They are not human beings. They are individual cells, like blood cells or neurons.
'Human beings' is the value judgment. You are declaring that an egg just fertilized is a human being, which is not a biological fact, it's a moral sentiment, drawn as a line.
 
'Human beings' is the value judgment. You are declaring that an egg just fertilized is a human being, which is not a biological fact, it's a moral sentiment, drawn as a line.

It's a biological fact. Biologists, even a majority of pro-choice ones, say so.



1652373751418.png
 
'All the time' is not unclear. You have to deliver a fetal death. It doesn't magick itself out of the womb.

Give me an example. How did any of these fetuses die?
 
You definitely don't work in OB/Gyn. Dead fetuses are delivered all the time.
You definitely haven't checked a dictionary recently because you keep using words you don't understand. Snag_e950968.png

Still waiting on you to get back to the class about how Supreme Court Justices are "illegitimate."
 
It's not about getting the answer I "like," it's about finding the truth. In this case, you have no problem taking a healthy viable human, inducing labor on the mother, delivering the baby, but electively killing it while in the birth canal, and then throwing it into medical waste rather than just delivering it alive and putting it up for adoption. That's disgusting.
Spare me the emotional rhetoric. I have always said an abortion is a woman's right to choose. But it seems you don't really understand how or why abortions are done. No one is going to abort a healthy, viable fetus. That's just lying propaganda.
 
A "baby person" :ROFLMAO:

Once a child is born it has baby status. People deliver dead babies all the time. They don't deliver dead fetuses.
If it's dead, then whether it's a fetus or baby is irrelevant.
 
Spare me the emotional rhetoric. I have always said an abortion is a woman's right to choose. But it seems you don't really understand how or why abortions are done. No one is going to abort a healthy, viable fetus. That's just lying propaganda.

If a mother wanted to abort a healthy baby at 34 weeks, would you support or oppose her wishes?
 
If a mother wanted to abort a healthy baby at 34 weeks, would you support or oppose her wishes?
I support her wishes. I did say it's a woman's right to choose. Of course, women generally do not have elective abortions at that stage, nor do physicians perform them. So your hypothetical question or implication is rather moot.
 
For those who eat eggs for breakfast; are you eating chicken?
 
Do you have a problem with elective intact dilation and extraction?
There are no elective intact dilation and extractions Abortions.

And you should have said abortion i your original question .
I almost needed one when my little one died at about 20 weeks gestation.

By law the fetus must be dead before labor can be induced or an extraction can start to take place.

Luckily for me the my malformed little on expelled on its own and I did not need the D and abortion to expell it.
 
Last edited:
This is not 'biology', though, it's a moral sentiment about value, confused for a biological 'fact'.

Why - or, more exactly, how so? Because sperm and ova are also definitionally human, and living, but they are excluded from 'being' and therefore valorization.


Lol - it is biology and, it is logic!
It is also by DEFINITION!


What do you think? The fetus is just a figment of the woman's imagination? :ROFLMAO:
The fact that the fetus exists makes him a being!


 
For those who eat eggs for breakfast; are you eating chicken?
:rolleyes:

If we're eating CHICKEN EGGS..............................in a way, yes!
We're eating the eggs of a chicken.
 
Which post # are you saying quotes the law? And I agree that someone who maliciously kills the unborn carried by a Woman should be found guilty of murder, so let's just stick to abortion.
And the difference is?

Some one stated that babies in the womb can't make decisions of care for themselves. Hey, neither can new borns or 6 month, 12 months. So birth doesn't seem to be the determine that a person can or can't care for themselves.
An invalid in a nursing home I guess doesn't deserve life by the pro abortion standard.
 
And the difference is?

Some one stated that babies in the womb can't make decisions of care for themselves. Hey, neither can new borns or 6 month, 12 months. So birth doesn't seem to be the determine that a person can or can't care for themselves.
An invalid in a nursing home I guess doesn't deserve life by the pro abortion standard.
No one but the Woman has a Right to abort her pregnancy.

Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy.
 
No, they aren't even photos of potential humans. It's a gotcha twitter twat.

Why should he? He isn't your huckleberry.

Besides, what you posted are two animal fetuses, not human. We've already seen that game played before.
Interesting that when you and I call @Liberal7360 out on his game all of a sudden he is nowhere to be found.
 
The SCOTUS already affirmed elective abortions are permissible up to viability. So there's no need for a bill to say what the SCOTUS already has. I have yet to see a rational argument put forth as to why abortions should be restricted before viability.

it needs to be a law because without that, the SCOTUS will continue to let each state decide if and when women can get abortions. The WHPA would have made all laws that ban abortions before 24 weeks moot.
 
Back
Top Bottom