I think abortion should be legal. I don't think a fetus is a baby, until it has sufficient brain activity. This is how doctors tell if someone is alive. Besides, bodily choice, is a human right. What are your thoughts?
Should abortion be legal?
I think abortion should be legal. I don't think a fetus is a baby, until it has sufficient brain activity.
A fetus has brain activity at 5 weeks into pregnancy (https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/books/chapters/the-ethical-brain.html).
Besides, bodily choice, is a human right.
The fetus is a separate body from the mother in the same way Siamese twins are separate bodies. Yet if one Siamese twin kills the other, no matter how inconvenient their presence is, which BTW lasts for their whole lifetime, it's not allowed. If we can essentially force Siamese twins to stay connected for their whole lives because of something that they cannot control, we can force pregnant women to stay pregnant for 9 months in order to save the life inside her, even if they got to that point without her consent.
If you get raped, you can and should get restitution/help for the pain that you endured during that rape and the non consensual pregnancy, but abortion is not an acceptable form of help. Rape victim compensation is part of my federal budget. I think paying the rape victim $25,000 per year over 10 years would be enough to help her out with things. If the rapist is known to the legal system, they get severely punished.
BTW, your conduct is getting better.
OMG, the ignorance an irrationality you present is so surprising for a libertarian.
1} the fetus/baby is an organism of the woman, until,
2} the fetus/baby is born out, has taken its first INspiration of oxygen/air,
3} has the life supporting umbilical cord severed.
And on top of the above rational, logical common sense truths we another BIG ONE;
1} we have 7.5 billion people on Earth, and that many humans, with the systems we have in place --- ex Grand Jeep Cherokee in every drive way--- is extremely detrimental to the ecological environment that sustains humanity,
2} we have 190 nations, each looking out for only them selves i.e. we have 190 captains trying to steer Space-ship Earth,
3} we have enough thermo-nuclear weapons would still kill;
..." A Physicians for Social Responsibility study modeled the humanitarian impact of detonating 300 Russian nuclear weapons over U.S. cities. The study found 75 to 100 million people would die within thirty minutes. "...
..." But since no one can actually win a nuclear war, the entire idea of achieving “security” through nuclear weapons is a false narrative. That’s why three-quarters of the nations on Earth have called for totally eliminating them. "...
.." Scientific climate modeling demonstrates that in a nuclear war, the burning cities could inject enough soot and smoke into the stratosphere to blot out the sun, dramatically disrupt the climate, ruin crop production, and put billions of people at risk of starvation. "...
.." No one can confidently predict how a nuclear war might end. If nuclear weapons are used again, it could easily escalate to involve the big arsenals—thousands of nuclear weapons. It’s hard to imagine how civilization would survive the resulting apocalypse. Here’s the thing to remember: If the missiles take flight, we’ll all become peace activists. But it will be too late. "...
Serioulsy Alex, you need to awaken your consciousness, as is the case with so many humans, --even 30 years after agreements between USA and USSR to reduce---- we have seeming mature adult humanity living with this potential apocalypse on Earth. Sad :--(
Go figure and get back to me with what really matters and what has the most significant relevance to humanities continued existence on Earth beyond another 100 years.
You have the right to your opinion. I reserve the right to choosee what to do with MY body. Abortion is a woman's right to choose.
"What are your thoughts?"
>Ignores someone else's thoughts
"RIGHT TO MY BODY BLAH BLAH BLAH"
why did you even start this thread?
But I DO have the right to my body. I don't owe you agreement. You don't have the right to my agreement.
Why is your social intelligence so low?
Stay on topic.
does your body have a penis? how many hearts does you body have? fingers, toes.....is unique and different dna "your body"?
Either a fetus is a human being or they aren't. It's not opinion based. The claim that a fetus is a human being is a fact because of the huge amount of evidence to support this claim.You have the right to your opinion
I reserve the right to choosee what to do with MY body.The fetus isn't your body, the same way Siamese twins don't own each other.
She wants to talk about abortion."What are your thoughts?">Ignores someone else's thoughts"RIGHT TO MY BODY BLAH BLAH BLAH"why did you even start this thread?
Why is your social intelligence so low?Poor conduct and such a claim requires verifiable evidence.
This is MY body, I have the right to choose what to do with my body. Forced organ donation is not a right.
You don't have the right to my body. I have the right to choose whether I donate MY organs!
that's true, but do you have a penis that you can donate? a second heart perhaps? because if you have them they are not yours, right? I mean those things you were not born with, right?
The fetus is separate.This is MY body, I have the right to choose what to do with my body.
Forced organ donation is not a right.I would make organ donation mandatory for dead people to save more lives and I lead by example. We'd save more lives if we increased the technology ability to store organs in because only about 1% of organ donors actually have their organs used because it's hard to use someone's organ if it's rotted for example.
This thread is confusing
I heard mentions about conjoined twins...
I also heard questions regarding the number of hearts a human has...
The topic of forced organ donations also came up- what!? That's not a thing!
Imagine being forced to donate your hand!?
Anyway, this is getting out of hand. Sorry.
Should be legal. Here are the arguments I heard.
- Saves "lives"
- Women should do what they want with their own body
- Some women can't handle having a child for various reasons
So the argument for pro-life is that you're basically a baby. Well first, after 20 weeks, a baby develops a consciousness, so I guess that should be the real debate? However I'm still undecided about abortion after 20 weeks.
However, before 20 weeks? Who cares? Let women make their own decisions! There should be no incentive for men to tell women what to do with their own bodies. Zero! Non! Nein! Negative! Alpha! Zucchini! Zei! Walkabo! Vaseline!
And for the people that say how the fetus is separate from the women body, no it's not. And even if it is (playing devil's advocate here). Does it change anything is a fetus is killed? And if the women is unprepared for a baby, then it'll make it worse.
The baby is formed when the sperm cell enters the vagina and connects to the ovary. Abortion should only be legal when in cases of rape or the danger of the mother life. Anything else, it was your mistake and their were counterceptives to use to prevent pregnancy.
When your sleeping, you are unconscious. Is it okay to kill sleeping people? No. Sleeping people still have intrinsic value so killing them needs to be banned. This is why when you draw the line of where does life begin to any point other than cell specialization, you approach inconsistencies.Well first, after 20 weeks, a baby develops a consciousness
And if the women is unprepared for a baby, then it'll make it worse.If your not ready to have a child, it's what adoption is for.
The mother's life, fine. But if a woman gets raped, she can get restitution for the rape pain she endured. Women who get raped need help, but abortion is not that help. There are alternative routes to getting healed from rape than from abortion.Abortion should only be legal when in cases of rape or the danger of the mother life.
Why add to an already overcrowded World?
does it concern you that blacks then Hispanics have the highest % of abortions?
Why add to an already overcrowded World?
The consistency test still applies. Would we kill human beings already born in an effort to reduce overpopulation? No. That would be mass murder. In order to solve overpopulation, we increase the carrying capacity of humans, which is being done. Contraception helps do that. GMOs help do that.
It's all conceptual.
Yet it's all real enough in it's own context.
It's a curious thing this life business.
And how seriously or not we take it mostly depends upon our parents generation and of course, where we were born.
So in our own contexts our opinions on abortion may vary somewhat.
But although different, both our opinions are still nonetheless rational.
So in our own contexts our opinions on abortion may vary somewhat.But although different, both our opinions are still nonetheless rational.
If it boils down to whether or not a fetus is a human being, either a fetus is a human being or they aren't. It's not opinion based. It's not a gray area. It's either black or white; either a fetus is a human being, or they aren't.
The fetus is separate.
So we can just ship every aborted fetus to you and you will look after them.
Hoorah, problem solved.