Have an opinion?
If you assume that a being is a human being from the moment of conception, then yes, it logically must be murder. Which indeed is why the courts and the law have tied themselves up in knots since Roe v. Wade trying to avoid defining when life begins.Hence why, at first, abortion was banned after the third trimester. Then the limit was refined to viability. Then, as viability has regressed to earlier and earlier stages of gestation, the limit has regressed to earlier and earlier in time.It is also why, now, some states have begun to use the "heartbeat standard" as the point after which abortion is not legal. All human beings have a heart. If the law can be compelled to recognize a heartbeat as definitive of a human being - the point being that most women will not know they are pregnant till after the point in time when a heartbeat is detectable - then abortion will be effectively banned.What the courts do not want to codify is the idea that the life of a human being can be taken - sanctioned by law - absent cause. A child being guilty of no crime save the fact of its conception, which itself it did not cause.Suffice to say, embody that idea in law and the consequences would be profound - and very bad. So the courts - as Roe v. Wade effectively took the question out of the hand of legislatures - are turning intellectual handstands to set a standard while avoiding the central question of when a fetus is a person.Indeed, the pro-choice argument is rooted in an intellectual conundrum. If the fetus is not a human person from the moment of conception, at what point - EXACTLY - does it become human? What, scientifically, legally, and morally, is the difference between the child one second before that EXACT moment, and one second after it? What are the implications if the law defines a date and then it turns out - after further scientific analysis - that it got it wrong?The courts are using an evasion. The fetus - from the moment of conception - cannot be anything other than a human person. It will not be a duck or a horse. Logically, a thing cannot be other than what it is at any stage of its development. Because if it can be, then scientifically the fetus has an equal potential to become an elephant as a baby.So the courts have fallen back on a semantic difference. We call a fetus a fetus, a baby a baby and a boy a boy and a man a man - even though, at every point in that continuum it is the same thing. An individual human person. The fact that we give different names to the same being at different points in time does not change the essential nature of the being. It is what it is and cannot be anything else at any point in that continuum.This then being why the point at which abortion is permitted is, slowly but surely, falling back earlier in time. Again, it having started at the first trimester and having since, in law, been refined as "viability," as the courts have periodically rewritten the standard. (Again, also remembering, legislatures - Federal, state or local - since Roe v. Wade, are excluded from drawing the line.)Long way around, yes, logically and philosophically, abortion is murder by virtue of it being the taking of the life of a human being who is not guilty of any crime at the will of another being. The law has only avoided stating that fact by relying on a semantic fiat - and a shifting point in time - that bears neither scientific, nor logical nor moral scrutiny.
Depends on the stage of development.If its just a few cells then no contiousness can possible have formed.This however is 100% murder : www.lifenews.com/.../
Well here's another question. Should everything that's is clearly wrong be illegal
I'm not sure anymore tbh, I use to think I knew, but it's just unclear.
Absolutely murder in the 1st premeditated degree. There is no degree , facet , variable or thin blue line between birth or death. It's either one or the other , dead or alive.
No. Even if I was opposed to abortion, legally it’s not murder.
Yes, killing an innocent baby is murder, unfortunately not legally in many countries but it doesn't change what the act is.
It’s not murder. We might as well start considering it to be murder every time a man jacks off.
It's not unlawful and it's not a human getting killed.
It is murder regardless. You're still killing something.
As long as it isn't born, I'd say it isn't murder
Can you fucking let go of this murder stuff?
only after four months, that's when it is a human
No that’s a dumb ass stance.
Are not your tired of these questions?
Yes I do.
They are murder you dumb twat
Check your grammar lol
You like banging girls. Are you prepared to accept the consequences if you get one pregnant?
@WhiteShoulder I don't get girls pregnant unless I want to. And yes, I accept the consequences of a child.
Cool. But sometimes accidents happen. Do you really wanna ruin her life and yours over an accident?
@WhiteShoulder A child doesn't ruin your life. A child enhances your life.
Yeah. She does.
That’s your perception. Being stuck with medical bills and paying for 18 years, putting education and careers on hold, years of extra stress and financial strains, can’t ruin her life?
@Agape93 No. By that logic your own life is ruined because you cost yourself money for medical bills, stress and strains. By that logic spouses ruin your life because they cause you stress.
Not to mention postpartum depression, ptsd and damage to the body are all distinct possibilities and realities for many.
That makes no sense lol I’m not paying for 18 years, damaging myself and putting my life on hold over my spouse or myself.
@Agape93 You don't know what it means to be married, do you. You can marry a guy and he's paralyzed from the neck down in a car accident.
I don’t give a shit about nor desire to be married. I also don’t want nor desire children. So what is your point lol
@Agape93 enjoy your cats. You know the point, so don't dodge it because it shot holes in your argument.
I have dogs, not cats, but I’ll enjoy my dogs and my lovers. Point is you don’t understand how other people feel. Whilst you see joy, she can see her future crumbling. While you see it as a life enhancer, she can see it as a life ruiner. It’s not your place to state what it is for both parties.
@bangyourhead cats are cool
@Agape93 Then if she's a person who thinks a baby will 'ruin' her life, she'd better get on the pill, use condoms, and/or learn how to take it in the ass. It's really easy not to get pregnant.
Or you can get with girls who follow your ideals and not force someone into a negative choice against their will. That’s a human rights violation. Also, as you said, pregnancies are good things. Made of love, I assume. Why would you turn something beautiful into a punishment?
@Agape93 It's a human right violation to have your brains sucked out and your arms and legs ripped apart by a forceps
It’s actually not because the fetus doesn’t have any rights at all until the third trimester, when most abortions are illegal anyways, and also because our right of bodily autonomy supersedes any right to life.
@Agape93 A child isn't your body. It doesn't share your DNA.
@Agape93 I agree
Wow you’re dense. A child came from her body, is physically part of her body. By the way, there are tumors with different blood types than the host body. DNA means nothing.
@Agape93 It means everything. A baby is not a tumor. Find me a scientific article that backs up your claim that a tumor has a different blood type, please.
Lol I never said a baby was a tumor. Also, do your own research dude. I’m not your secretary. You are out of your depth on abortion and human rights. Try again when you’re informed. Lol
@Agape93 So you can't find one is what you mean. That's always the refuge of "I can't back up my bullshit".. telling someone to do their own research. lol.
It’s not my job to research for you. You can’t even grasp the fact that abortion is not murder, why am I going to waste time hunting sources you’ll accept? Thus far you failed to understand :::Empathy LogicHuman rightsBiology
@Agape93 Abortion is murder. You're killing another person. Have a good day, you've shown you're full of shit.
Lmao wow. Murder is the ILLEGAL killing of another person with malicious aforethought. Abortion is the early termination of pregnancy. When a girl seeks an abortion, she seeks to end an unwanted pregnancy. That is not malicious. It’s a medical choice.
It’s not even a crime lol It’s killing, sure, but not murder.
@Agape93 It hopefully will be. You're arguing stupid semantics to make yourself feel better about people murdering babies. So god damned silly.
You’re the one who can’t understand that murder is a crime. Abortion is not a crime. You seem to confuse killing with murder. That shows your level of ignorance.
Come back when you actually know what you’re talking about. Until then, leave this to grown ups.
@Agape93 lol that's hilarious. Tell me again about the tumors with different blood types, adult.
Again, do your own research. :) also read up on the law, the UN human rights charter and try to understand basic logic and empathy.
@Agape93 Again, you're BULL SHITTING. I don't give a flying fuck about the UN. A group of scumbag bureaucrats have zero moral authority to tell anyone anything.And basic logic and empathy are that a child in a womb doesn't deserve to have it's brains sucked out because some self centered woman thinks it would be inconvenient.
What, you do? The one who seems to support turning women into broodmares against their will? Who doesn’t even care enough about human rights to understand them? That’s hilarious. Yet you don’t care about her, her rights, her choices, her feelings or anything about it. All you care about is a fetus you don’t have to carry and birth. You don’t have empathy. You have no logic. You’re welcome to hate and stand against abortion, but don’t try to claim a moral high ground that you aren’t capable of attaining.
@Agape93 I do care about a woman's body. She has the right to avoid sex, she has the right and should have access to any and all birth control. There's plenty of choices available.The UN isn't the authority on human rights, sweetie.Turning a woman into a 'broodmare' against her will implies that I'm forcing her to get pregnant against her will. You're being stupid.
Correct! One choice she has, and doubles as birth control technically, is abortion. If you cared, you wouldn’t support causing harm. They at least are better than you are. Broodmares are kept for breeding. You are forcing her to stay pregnant, which fits the criteria of being kept for the purposes of reproducing.
Ok roleplay time. Say you have a girl you actually love, and she gets pregnant. She wants an abortion, would you make her stay pregnant (includes guilt tripping), or would you support her choice or would you leave?
@Agape93 I've never raped refugees, so I'm pretty confident my moral compass is aligned better than the UN's. I'm so glad you defend their behavior. Dolt.Broodmares are impregnated regardless of their wishes. And you're literally comparing women to horses, now. I don't date women that are into killing their unborn children. Thanks, though.
When did i say anything about behavior? I’m talking their laws. Their doctrine. You’re still behind them in morality. You’re just above Pennywise. And forced to give birth against their will, which is the other half of what a brood mare is and the most important aspect. So what, can’t answer the scenario? Typical
@Agape93 Just above pennywise, that's hilarious. I'll answer your scenario when you find proof of a tumor having a different blood supply.
Awww because you can’t do your own research you won’t answer a scenario? Lmao ok then. Good luck with your ignorance. I sincerely hope you don’t reproduce.
@Agape93 lol. You really think I don't know you were bullshitting. That makes you dumber than I thought you were.
Coming from the one who doesn’t understand that semantics matter, how human rights work or basic logic, cute. :)
@Agape93 You're deflecting again. So transparent
You’re ignoring basic information willingly, as it defies your viewpoint on abortion.
@Agape93 basic information as there's no such thing as a tumor having a different blood type?
Basic information as logic, empathetic understanding, psychology, human rights and semantics. You ignore that because it’s inconvenient for you. You ignore it because acknowledging it would let you realize how immoral you are. That sort of thing. Remind me why I’m wasting my time with you still?
@Agape93 Because you have the hots for me.
No, it isn’t
no i dont
You cannot undo this action. The opinion owner is going to be notified and earn 7 XPER points.