beagle9
Diamond Member
- Nov 28, 2011
- 44,080
- 16,423
- 2,250
Dependent, and yet she kills it ?? Sad state of mind that is.You left out the part that says "...and dependent on the mother to sustain its life". Since it needs the mother its rights do not at all supersede the rights of the host it needs to live.No, the life in that womb should be protected just like any other human being is protected.
But your point of view is based on your belief in the "personhood" of the fetus, correct? And, as I've pointed out, there's no consensus on that belief. Many, if not most, people don't believe that a fetus in a woman's womb qualifies as a legal person with rights.
If I may interject . . .
I don't know about Beagle, but MY pro-life point of view has nothing to do with made-up left-think concepts like "personhood" - whatever the fuck that's supposed to be. Nor is it necessarily a "religious belief", as you said in your previous post, although my religious beliefs DO coincide with it.
It's actually a rational assessment of the available medical and scientific information, divorced from any glandular thinking about "But it SUCKS to have a baby when you didn't plan to, so there HAS to be a way that it's okay to pretend nothing happened!"
A fetus is a living, individual organism of the human species, distinct from all other living, individual organisms of the human species. Not one single word of that is indisputable on scientific grounds. There is nothing that a logical, rational person can say biologically about a born human being which could not equally be said about a fetus.
And I fail to see "But most people FEELZ otherwise, because they don't know jack shit about medical science!" as a persuasive argument for anything.