Comrade Tovya said:
Right, like women who don't want to be mothers killing their unborn babies... "angry men" killing their pregnant women out of pre-partum rage is almost unheard of... generally the guys who are mad just skip their child support payments. Which is cowardly in and of itself as well I might add. I listened to my third childs heart beat (and watched his heart beating on the 3D sonogram as well) when he was a mere 12 weeks in the womb. The doctor told my wife to watch what she ate because the baby eats the same thing she does. If he weren't a "real" baby yet, what she ate wouldn't matter. But the fact is, he is very much alive... they feel pain, they suck their thumbs, their hearts beat, they can hear music from outside the womb, they adjust their position in the womb when they are uncomfortable.. the list could go on and on. It's been scientifically proven, over and over, that an unborn baby is just that... a baby, a living being, so I still find it hard to understand why people refuse to admit what science has already proven. That's the strangest irony to me. Conservatives are always called "right wing religous wack-o's" because they believe in a "GOD" and refuse to adhere to the sensibilities of science, but when it comes to the rights of the unborn, they refuse to believe that a fetus is a child, even though science has proven that it is. So if us "right wing crazy people" don't listen to the reason of science, why is it that when it comes to the abortion issue, we seem to be the only ones who adhere to it? It certainly makes the moral grounds of liberalism appear weak and hypocritical. |
I can culture my skin cells in a petri dish and they are alive. My sperm are alive. A woman's egg is alive.
Of course fetuses are alive. A sperm is alive and an egg is alive. Claiming that a fetus is somehow more alive than any of those other things is an arbitrary distinction. Life doesn't begin at conception, it begins before conception.
Should I be prosecuted for masturbating because my sperm die when I masturbate? Should a women be prosecuted for ovulating because her egg dies?
Science doesn't distinguish between any of those things in terms of whether or not they are alive, because they are all alive. So claiming that science is on your side because science says that babies are alive is essentially a circular argument. You are just stating the obvious.
Now if you want to talk about brain wave activity and things like that, those are better arguments. But arguing that a baby shouldn't be aborted simply because science recognizes that it is a living thing is an overly simplistic argument. Science recognizes that bacteria are living things, should we be forbidden from killing them?
We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls. The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke
It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...." Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson
