Also, above posters who claim "National Socialists" are "socialists" are confusing two different terms which happen to be homonyms; one refers nationalist society, and the other an economic form - socialist economics. In reality national socialism and socialism are polar opposites of one and other, and the rise of the national socialists was actually largely on the promise to extinguish socialist economics. It is the same as people who claim that scientific theory is the same as a random idea theory, because they don't understand that the word "theory" has teo different meanings. Or if a doctor tells someone they had a stroke, it is not the same as a stroke of luck or a stroke of genius. Etc...

A brain dead person is also biologically a human being.

And also biologically brain dead; as in the brain has ceased to live; an organ necessary for life in a developed human being has expired. There's not really any logical link between a developing human being and a brain dead one; unless the fetus is in fact brain dead (as in its brain has died) - as death is something that can be inflicted at any point in time, and a fetal stage of human development always occurs during the beginning stages of a human's biological lifespan (minus the possibility of death, which can occur at any point during a lifespan).

"It's like what Bill Maher once said: Not all Republicans are racists, but if you are racist you are probably a Republican (I'm paraphrasing). "

Using that Logic then there is nothing wrong with saying "Not all Muslims are Terrorists, but all terrorist are Muslim"

You can't have it both ways...

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?

There is a huge difference between ending a life that is completely brain dead and ending a life that is in development that is in the process of gaining a conscious.

Saying that terminating a fetus because it does not yet have a conscious does not justify taking away its right to live. a person who is brain dead is not coming back as a person. They are in almost all senses a dead body with a beating heart. A human being in the womb will develop a conscious and be accepted into society as a person after their birthing.

Of course.... neither does a newborn.

If there is no convincing arguements a newborn is a person...

should people be allowed to kill newborns...

Like as suggesting in Badgenome's post.

Note, I'm actually for abortion.  Your reasoning just seems to be either be inconsistant or your failing to esxplain part of your arguement.

The same way you deduce planethood throguh the scientific method.

Ever since the scientifc method, that has been the sceintific definition and concept of personhood.

Like I said.  That's an arguement that's made.

I don't particularly agree with it.

I think abortions should be allowed up until higher brainwaves... because at that point your only killing a potential human.

And additionally, while it should be legal, you should feel pretty awful for doing it.

Because I don't believe there are enough people that want to adopt these children. I don't want to force women to keep children they don't want either.