Allfreedom99 said:
Mr Puggsly said:
Rath said:
Allfreedom99 said:
still the life in the womb is a human being in development no matter any way you try to look at it. and by terminating that life one is ending a human life. So when it comes to abortion we always hear "oh its up to the mother to have the right to choose."
Its like saying, "since this human being does not yet have a concious and therefore does not have a voice to claim it has a right to live then we can justify killing it."
What real justification is there for ending the life of a human being in the womb? can you name one?
|
There are no convincing arguments that a fetus is a person, therefore there is no convincing reason why women should not be allowed to have abortions.
|
Well a fetus has a heart beat after just a few weeks so it appears to me an abortion kills something that's alive. Now is it a person... well that seems like a subjective argument.
My gut says abortions are technically murder. However, we don't have a solution to really deal with all these unwanted children. So I'm only pro choice because nobody wants these children.
|
So if abortion is indeed ending a human being's life and taking away their individual right to live can be defined as murder then why justify doing it because the mother dosn't want that individual when they are birthed? Why not give the child up for adoption instead of taking away that individual's right to live?
|
Here we get into the difference between 'human life' and a 'person'. Ending a fetus is not murder if it is not considered a person.
@Jumping. In the early stages a fetus has no brain activity at all.
@Kasz. The definition of a planet is based on rigid parameters - it has to have its shape defined by gravity and it has to have cleared its orbit. 'I think therefore I am' is not a rigid scientific statement, it's a philisophical one.
@Kasz again. A newborn has a HUGELY more developed brain that a fetus at say ~25 weeks.
