vlad321 said:
Yes, if it's proven they would harm disasterously the life of the others. More problems in your example. Half of the population? Half the population is women yes but not everyone will get pregnant, and even less will have an abortion. Your example is just bad through and through. Again you are equating a fetus to a born human. HUGE difference between the two there. Until a fetus does something to differentiate itself from that of a dog or a cat or another mammal in general, then it's not human. |
So, you're allowed to ruin or end the life of one person if it makes another person's life better?
"Half of the population? Half the population is women yes but not everyone will get pregnant, and even less will have an abortion". What does this have to do with anything? Rath and I were discussing the groups that support and oppose abortion, which, according to this Gallup poll, are about half-and-half.
"Again you are equating a fetus to a born human. HUGE difference between the two there. Until a fetus does something to differentiate itself from that of a dog or a cat or another mammal in general, then it's not human".
I'll assume this in respose to my other post. I'm not really sure what it is you mean in your second sentence. Do you mean differentiate itself from the fetus of a dog or cat? If so, there's a huge genetic difference, so that's one way already.
Alas! I must be off to work, so I won't be responding for a while.
Okami
To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made. I won't open my unworthy mouth.