Are you Pro-life or Pro-choice?

[elprincipe]

Metallicube said:

elprincipe said:

Metallicube said:

 

The more I read these pro-life arguements, the more I realize that way too many people let their emotions and perspective of what is "morally right" cloud their judgment of logic and reason.

That's funny because I feel the same way many times about arguments made by pro-abortion-legal folks. It is not logical to arbitrarily define humanity based on birth or time in the womb, as most of you do. Strangely, a lot of you will tell us that a baby past his or her due date that could easily be delivered by C-section is not human yet since a thin layer or skin and fluid separates it from the outside world. Or that a non-human fetus magically becomes a human baby after 180 days in the womb, or 120 days the womb. Or that a non-human fetus magically becomes human because it develops a certain organ or feature, despite the fact that newborns - obviously people - still are developing many of their internal systems and bone structure. All of these arguments must be based on some degree of emotion, since they are not reasonably concluded from all the medical knowledge available to us.

um actually, what I explained earlier was basically the OPPOSITE of what you're claiming I said.. In fact, everything your claiming is said by pro choice people is actually used by pro lifers.. Pro lifers are the ones who attempt to define at what time during the pregnancy does the developing fetus become a human when there is no science behind it to back it up. If I read this wrong, please let me know, but that is what I got from reading this... I recognise that everyone has their own view of when a fetus is a human baby and that actually strengthens my main point as to why abortion should remain legal.

Everyone only has their own unique personal perspective, but there is no scientific fact to claim when a fetus becomes a baby. This is why making abortion illegal would become problematic because there would need to be a precise definition of when during the pregnancy the fetus becomes a "human" baby. Making abortion illegal would require the government to designate a specific time in the cycle in which the procedure goes from birth control to "abortion." Where do you draw the line? No matter how early you draw the line, there will still be some extreme pro lifes out there that want to make it extend even further, and soon we'll be banning birth control pills because they stop a potential baby from being born.

To me, what makes a fetus a "baby" is being born. It's logical, it makes sense, and it is a solid definite time. Otherwise why do mothers when pregnant say I'm GOING to have a baby, rather than I have a baby? I know this is stretching it but I'm just trying to make a point. Now this doesn't necessarilly mean that I believe late term abortions are no worse than getting an abortion earlier in the pregnancy, but to me a fetus is a baby when it is born. End of story.

 

I don't know if you've paid attention to my posts, but I've laid out the most logical point to assume that human life has begun based on facts and scientific inquiry.

Your "extreme pro lifes" argument is a false one that uses the false "slippery slope" argument.  I could just as easily say that because abortion is legal it will follow that eventually pro-abortionists will push to make infanticide legal, but that would be just as dumb.

If you really don't believe a child in the womb is a human being, why do you have any problem with late-term abortion?  After all, it's not human, just a "parasite," right?