• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

Why Save the Fetus? [W:478]

So because things are bad for some, we should kill all?

That's why it's called 'choice.' Probably the best ones to know that are the mothers....they know the realities of their own lives and what they would be bringing a child into.

Hence, choice being the best option.
 
That's why it's called 'choice.' Probably the best ones to know that are the mothers....they know the realities of their own lives and what they would be bringing a child into.

Hence, choice being the best option.

Actually, the best would be the life that is being terminated. You should see if it wants to be terminated or not. Otherwise, it's just at the behest of the mother's convenience.
 
An unborn child is not permanently lacking any trait that a human being at a later stage of development has.
I wonder if that is why three year olds do not vote or drive cars or can not buy booze or enter contractual agreements?
 
Last edited:
Actually, the best would be the life that is being terminated. You should see if it wants to be terminated or not. Otherwise, it's just at the behest of the mother's convenience.

Oh, we're not making rational arguments anymore?

Sorry, my bad.
 
I don't know what the point of your analogy was there. Is it saying that because some people have it bad, we should just abort everyone because there's a possibility it will come out wrong in the wash?

I understand that sometime you have a need to nit pic posts. But as an academia, this post certainly doesn't show off any your superior intellect. I would expect a post like this from say, Jay... but not you.

Where did you see such an analogy in my post that would lead to "kill them all" or just abort everyone"? Were did I even mention "abortion".

Excuse me if I don't respond in length to your post, which is not worth the finger energy. It's a little on the absurd.

What other imaginary analogy can you pull out of my post...about children who have serious emotions problems who live in state approved institutions?

Hey, why is it a deal to you? They're alive. You help pay for their care. Probably a whole 1/10th of a cent of your annual income tax.
 
True, I don't have much regard for women who have no concern for their newborns.

I had a lot for my newborns and so did my daughters.

I would say over 99 percent who have or have had a newborn are very concerned about them.
 
I had a lot for my newborns and so did my daughters.

I would say over 99 percent who have or have had a newborn are very concerned about them.

I don't doubt you, Minnie.
 
Not quite so. People who are on life support and lack brain activity are routinely disconnected. Now we know that killing persons is not legal.

How often is it the case, when someone who is deemed “brain-dead” is taken off of life support, that there is thought to be any realistic hope that if this person were left on such support for several months more, that he would recover full brain function and go on to live a worthwhile, productive life?
 
I realize I am jumping in, altho I did read the previous.

My question is...what different does the distinction you are continually focusing on make? In terms of consciousness, sentience, viability, personhood?

Not much at all. Until much much later.

I'm not sure if you actually read all the way back but my first post was simply a response to a poster who said there were no brain waves at 20 weeks, which is wrong. The abortion issue can be a touchy subject and it's important to get the facts straight especially when knowing the developmental stages of the fetus. I take issue with people distorting the truth or just outright lying in order to make their case. I hear a lot of pro-choice individuals complain about that in pro-lifers but they don't seem to care when it comes from their own side.

Why don't you think it's relevant to establish an accurate timeline for fetal development?
 
Why don't you think it's relevant to establish an accurate timeline for fetal development?

Sure but not esp. within the framework of abortion. For that, for my position, only viability needs to be determined.
 
I wonder if that is why three year olds do not vote or drive cars or can not buy booze or enter contractual agreements?

Indeed. It can certainly be argued, using the same logic that the babykillers use to justify abortion that a three-year-old is not nearly as fully human as an adult. Yet all but the most extreme on the babykillers' side recognize that a three-year-old is a human being, fully entitled to the same basic protection as all human beings, including the right not to be killed for no better reason than that his existence is inconvenient for someone else.
 
Indeed. It can certainly be argued, using the same logic that the babykillers use to justify abortion that a three-year-old is not nearly as fully human as an adult. Yet all but the most extreme on the babykillers' side recognize that a three-year-old is a human being, fully entitled to the same basic protection as all human beings, including the right not to be killed for no better reason than that his existence is inconvenient for someone else.

This is factually false....from SCOTUS all the way down to more than half of all Americans.
 
I don't know what the point of your analogy was there. Is it saying that because some people have it bad, we should just abort everyone because there's a possibility it will come out wrong in the wash?

No one is saying that.
But I believe a woman should be allowed to make choice.
She knows more about her health in mind and body both and if she feels she does not want to remain pregnant for whatever reason the choice should be hers ( within the parameters of Roe vs Wade ) along with input from her doctor, her husband, her clergy , or whom ever she wishes to consult .
 
I understand that sometime you have a need to nit pic posts. But as an academia, this post certainly doesn't show off any your superior intellect. I would expect a post like this from say, Jay... but not you.

Where did you see such an analogy in my post that would lead to "kill them all" or just abort everyone"? Were did I even mention "abortion".

Excuse me if I don't respond in length to your post, which is not worth the finger energy. It's a little on the absurd.

What other imaginary analogy can you pull out of my post...about children who have serious emotions problems who live in state approved institutions?

Hey, why is it a deal to you? They're alive. You help pay for their care. Probably a whole 1/10th of a cent of your annual income tax.

I didn't add an analogy, I just asked what the point of yours was. But if a simple question is going to elicit this form of aggressive, emotional retort; then maybe I'll just drop it and wait for someone a bit more rational.
 
Oh, we're not making rational arguments anymore?

Sorry, my bad.

What's irrational? I've given actual case where one was happy to not be aborted, even when born to someone who didn't want him, even when put through State care and adoption agencies. I fear that perhaps this little emotional tiff of yours is made because it's easier than addressing the fundamental.
 
Bluntly? Because you see this...


c-baby11.webp






...while others look a little farther down the road and see this:


happybaby.webp





That's the difference in a nutshell.
 
I am the same organism that started in my mother's womb
No, you are not. Humans have never been single celled organisms. Maybe you should revisit basic biology.

What baffles me is that some of the extreme pro-abortion folk seem to have little to no understanding of science or biology.
Oh the irony...Thanks for the laugh.
 
Sure but not esp. within the framework of abortion. For that, for my position, only viability needs to be determined.

Viabiliy is my position also but I do find it very interesting that a fetus does not have a measurable EEG and does not feel pain until after viability.

It is also very comforting to me to know when I miscarried the very malformed fetus at about 20 weeks gestation it was never aware and never felt any pain.
 
Last edited:
Are they lying inside the body of another human being, sucking the life's blood out of them in order to survive?

False logic. Fetuses don't "suck the life" out of mothers except in rare situations where the mother has severe health issues. Childbirth is a natural and necessary event.

Just curious, how many of the people here can claim that their mother's died in childbirth?
 
False logic. Fetuses don't "suck the life" out of mothers except in rare situations where the mother has severe health issues. Childbirth is a natural and necessary event.

Here's how 'rare' death and harm are:

Again, the minimization of the risks to women.

Deaths in childbirth on the rise in the US:

Why are so many U.S. women dying during childbirth? : News

From the article:

"the rate hovers around 15 deaths per 100,000 births"

"each year in the U.S., about 700 women die of pregnancy-related complications and 52,000 experience emergencies such as acute renal failure, shock, respiratory distress, aneurysms and heart surgery. An additional 34,000 barely avoid death."

"The rate of severe complications during and after delivery have also doubled in the last decade, according to a 2012 federal study. Near-misses, where a woman nearly dies, increased by 27 percent."

"Deaths from stroke are also on the rise. A recent CDC study shows pregnancy-related strokes increased by 50 percent in 2006-2007, compared with 1994-1996."
They are not all predictable or preventable. That's total BS.

No stranger or government has ANY right to demand that a woman take these risks if she does not want a child.
 
Indeed. It can certainly be argued, using the same logic that the babykillers use to justify abortion that a three-year-old is not nearly as fully human as an adult. Yet all but the most extreme on the babykillers' side recognize that a three-year-old is a human being, fully entitled to the same basic protection as all human beings, including the right not to be killed for no better reason than that his existence is inconvenient for someone else.

Not really. This, uuuh, 'babykiller' acknowledges a right to life so long as there actually is life. We've nationally drawn a line at around 23 week- when a fetus would have a decent chance of survival outside of the womb, which I think is proper. On one side, a fetus, clearly not much more than a lump of cells as an extension of a mother's body. Might it have brain waves and a heartbeat? Sure. A person? Not yet. On the other side, a living breathing human being, not a guess, not a maybe, but definite living breathing life.
 
I didn't add an analogy, I just asked what the point of yours was. But if a simple question is going to elicit this form of aggressive, emotional retort; then maybe I'll just drop it and wait for someone a bit more rational.

Oh, now I was the one making an aggressive, emotional "retort" after being baited up with "kill them all" - "everybody aborted"? You weren't at all doing that with your post to me, which clearly doesn't at all relate to anything I posted..., huh?

How about I say something a bit more rational like, "HELL YA, KILL ALL DIM SUMSABIOTECHES....ABORT THEIR LITTLE ASSES - EVER DANG ONE OF'EM whoever "all and everybody is."

Or how about, "Oh gawd, this depressing discussion make me want to do myself in. You've made me realize my life sucks the big one! I should have been aborted when I was 10 years old so I wouldn't have ponder the possibility of living such a terrible life."

Rational stuff like that?

Or...????

How about, Ikari that we simple write this exchange off as one that should have never taken place from the beginning? Ya dig?
 
Back
Top Bottom