It is hypocritical to use religion and the Bible to justify opposition to abortion.

[Kenny]

It's not a baby, and the biological facts indicate it is part of the woman's body. You also ignored what @sojourner said.

The choices are either legal abortions, or illegal abortions, either way women will seek terminations, the latter will enslave or criminalise women, and cause untold suffering.

#259

 

[Subduction Zone]

hmmm... can you give me scientific support? And did the baby force his/her way into the body?

Actually it did. You should study up on the birds and the bees.

 

[sojourner]

#259

We’re talking about rights, not science. If the fetus is part of the mother’ body, it has no autonomy to have rights. That’s the way it’s seen, because fetuses can’t inherit, and can’t be the beneficiary of life insurance payouts. They’re not considered to be autonomous human beings.

If the fetus isn’t part of the mother’s body, then if she doesn’t consent, it has no right to be there.

The science part would be to determine which it is: part of the mother’s body, or not part. Either way, the fetus has 0 legal rights of its own.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

hmmm... can you give me scientific support?

Scientific support for what?

And did the baby force his/her way into the body?

Consent to sex isn't consent to pregnancy, and consent to pregnancy can be withdrawn. Continuous free consent is the standard.

What you're suggesting is the reasoning of a rapist:

- "she said yes to oral, so that means she agreed to sex even if she says no."
- "she said yes to sex, so that means she agreed to pregnancy even if she says no."

- "she agreed to sex to begin with, so I can force her to keep going even though she's telling me she wants it to stop."
- "she agreed to pregnancy to begin with, so I can force her to keep going even though she's telling me she wants it to stop."

 

[Sheldon]

hmmm... can you give me scientific support? And did the baby force his/her way into the body?

It's topologically connected, uses the woman's immune system, and metabolism, and gets all nutrients and oxygen from her blood.

 

[Kenny]

We’re talking about rights, not science. If the fetus is part of the mother’ body, it has no autonomy to have rights. That’s the way it’s seen, because fetuses can’t inherit, and can’t be the beneficiary of life insurance payouts. They’re not considered to be autonomous human beings.

If the fetus isn’t part of the mother’s body, then if she doesn’t consent, it has no right to be there.

The science part would be to determine which it is: part of the mother’s body, or not part. Either way, the fetus has 0 legal rights of its own.

Based on what law?

 

[Kenny]

Scientific support for what?


Consent to sex isn't consent to pregnancy, and consent to pregnancy can be withdrawn. Continuous free consent is the standard.

What you're suggesting is the reasoning of a rapist:

- "she said yes to oral, so that means she agreed to sex even if she says no."
- "she said yes to sex, so that means she agreed to pregnancy even if she says no."

- "she agreed to sex to begin with, so I can force her to keep going even though she's telling me she wants it to stop."
- "she agreed to pregnancy to begin with, so I can force her to keep going even though she's telling me she wants it to stop."

1) Scientific evidence that it isn't "another person"
2) We are talking abortion - Rape resulting in pregnancy is about 32,000 a year vs abortion - 930,000

stay with the program please.

 

[Kenny]

It's topologically connected, uses the woman's immune system, and metabolism, and gets all nutrients and oxygen from her blood.

So? It has a different blood type, different finger prints, different brain wave length, different organs and a 24 oz baby can be removed from the mother and live, and not use mom's immune system, metabolism, nutrients and oxygen.

 

[Sheldon]

really?

Yes, absolutely.

 

[Sheldon]

TagliatelliMonster said: ↑
Not a strawman.

He's talking about objective facts (ie: things that are true regardless of what people believe)

You keep insisting on countering that by pointing at subjective personal beliefs.

So it's actually you who's engaging in the strawman.

Really?

Yes.

 

[Sheldon]

I just don't put too much mental efforts in what you say.

That is abundantly clear, not much more into what you post either. One wonders why you are minded to respond at all, if you have nothing of any substance or value to offer?

I look forward to more hand waving, one word dismissals and emojis, maybe debate is not for you?

 

[Sheldon]

I realize that no matter what I say, your philosophical world view is going to trump whatever is said. It makes you... non-objective.

Rubbish, that is just blatant evasion, You asked me a question:

KenS said: ↑
When does reality conform to what you think is objective?

I gave you an answer:

Is it an objective fact that the world is not flat? That would seem to be an example wouldn't you say?

However despite 5 attempts now, you have not reciprocated and answered mine.

Is it an objective fact that the world is not flat? I think by now you are the only one who thinks the reason is not clear to everyone.

 

[Sheldon]

But we are back to square one as to if the baby in the womb is the mother's body or another body.

#265

 

[Sheldon]

So? It has a different blood type, different finger prints, different brain wave length, different organs and a 24 oz baby can be removed from the mother and live, and not use mom's immune system, metabolism, nutrients and oxygen.

So what? I never said there were no differences did I, you asked for evidence it was part of a woman's body, I gave it, you don't seem to have addressed it though, just made a string of claims, some irrelevant, and others false since you asked about a foetus or blastocyst, and some of your claims are referring to a baby after it is born.

 

[Sheldon]

did the baby force his/her way into the body?

It's not a baby, lets try pictures to simplify things:

This is a blastocyst or embryo

This is a baby:

Hope this helps illustrate the difference, since words seem to be failing to make it clear.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

1) Scientific evidence that it isn't "another person"

What? I covered both bases. Why are you asking (besides as a weird distraction)?

2) We are talking abortion - Rape resulting in pregnancy is about 32,000 a year vs abortion - 930,000

stay with the program please.

No, this is very much the program: the anti-choice movement uses a rapist's approach to the issue of consent.

Your position is the moral equivalent to that of a rapist. The only difference between what you're doing and rape is that in rape, there's one perpetrator and one victim, but in your case, you've teamed up with many other perpetrators to victimize many other women.

You support forced pregnancy the same way a rapist supports forced sex.

"She invited me upstairs. What did she think was going to happen?"
"She had sex without a condom. What did she think was going to happen?"

This is the core problem with the anti-choice movement, so it's not going away.

 

[sojourner]

Based on what law?

American law. There is no law that allows a fetus to either inherit or to be a beneficiary. Pretty good indicator that the fetus is not an autonomous person.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

American law. There is no law that allows a fetus to either inherit or to be a beneficiary. Pretty good indicator that the fetus is not an autonomous person.

Interesting point.

 

[Kenny]

It's not a baby, lets try pictures to simplify things:

This is a blastocyst or embryo

This is a baby:

Hope this helps illustrate the difference, since words seem to be failing to make it clear.

LOL cherry picking

Spoiler: baby in the womb

Spoiler: This is NOT a baby

 

[Kenny]

@9-10ths_Penguin , @sojourner , @Sheldon

ok... conclusion.

You three are pro-abortion which you have every right to think that way. You offered your points countering mine and visa-versa.

No one has really debunked my position that it is a human being in that at 20 oz it can survive on its own. So I think I can hold to my position just as much as you can hold onto yours.

That is what makes America great--freedom of speech.