(May 21, 2014 at 3:10 pm)Deidre32 Wrote: Lol did I read that right a few posts up? A fetus doesn't grow?

I don't whether to laugh or be sad that some of you have convinced yourselves of the lies of the pro-abortion extremists.

All life has a beginning point. Your opinion doesn't negate that biological fact.

Deidre my love, yes of course a fetus grow, inside of its mother's womb. The point was just like a sperm cannot become a fetus without the egg and the uterin wall, a fetus cannot become a baby on its own. If you have a fetus outside of a womb it will not grow in its own.

What a really sad thread. :/

(May 21, 2014 at 3:10 pm)BlackSwordsman Wrote: This logic is so flawed.

Contradicting your narrative that a clump of cells is a person doesn't make it flawed logic.

KUSA Wrote:I agree with you here but what would you call this?

Pretty messy.

(May 21, 2014 at 3:25 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote:

(May 21, 2014 at 3:10 pm)BlackSwordsman Wrote: This logic is so flawed.

Contradicting your narrative that a clump of cells is a person doesn't make it flawed logic.

KUSA Wrote:I agree with you here but what would you call this?

Pretty messy.

Take a Biology class.

A clump of cells, is life.

Here is an into to Biology.

Enjoy

ASU School of Life Science: Biology Lesson

The ball is now in your court.

(May 21, 2014 at 3:22 pm)Losty Wrote:

(May 21, 2014 at 3:10 pm)Deidre32 Wrote: Lol did I read that right a few posts up? A fetus doesn't grow?

I don't whether to laugh or be sad that some of you have convinced yourselves of the lies of the pro-abortion extremists.

All life has a beginning point. Your opinion doesn't negate that biological fact.

Deidre my love, yes of course a fetus grow, inside of its mother's womb. The point was just like a sperm cannot become a fetus without the egg and the uterin wall, a fetus cannot become a baby on its own. If you have a fetus outside of a womb it will not grow in its own.

I know but it is the way life is. No pun. The reason I lean pro life (and I hate that phrase because it implies I'm anti abortion which I'm not) is that I think it has a very dark side that comes with it. Not just for the woman who undergoes one but also for society. We don't believe a fetus has rights. It can't have rights technically because it can't live on its own, true. Or grow on its own. But that creates a slippery slope.

Where we start to view life in terms of only if someone can sustain it on their own.
When does life begin? I guess that becomes the question.

That's all I'm saying.

I've had friends who've had abortions who still struggle after over a decade of making their decisions. There is a dark side to it. For society as well

I guess we just feel the way we do about this topic.

(May 21, 2014 at 1:35 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(May 21, 2014 at 1:32 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Sorry for mixing up the names. A fetus and a tire are not on the same level. One is currently growing into a fully formed human. The other is not currently growing into a car.

Actually, a fetus independent of anything else, as we've confirmed we're discussing, isn't growing at all. It's most likely dead. Just as a tire, independent at a minimum a person to construct the car, also isn't doing anything. For both to reach the level of human/car, they need outside interference from at least one person. The equivalency stands.

I guess I'll just have to step out then, because we don't seem to understand each other. The thread is kind of going too fast for me anyway.

(May 21, 2014 at 3:30 pm)BlackSwordsman Wrote: The ball is now in your court.

Take a reading class. I said that the clump of cells isn't a 'person'.

Has anyone else noticed - likely the ladies have - that the majority of the most outspoken anti-choicers are male?

(May 21, 2014 at 3:30 pm)BlackSwordsman Wrote: A clump of cells, is life.

So is bacteria. You gonna stop disinfecting your stuff now?

Deirdre Wrote:Where we start to view life in terms of only if someone can sustain it on their own.

You're kinda describing the world we currently live in, there: if a person is dying and can't sustain their own life, we don't force organ donation on the unwilling to cover for the deficiency. Granted, we understand that it's not ideal, we recognize it as something we'd prefer not to happen, but in every other case we respect the autonomy of other beings over the life of someone who cannot sustain their own existence. Why the sudden exemption for the pre-born?

I fully understand being squeamish about this, and I get that it's a moral grey area. I think you'll find that most of us pro-choice dudes and dudettes are also pro-life in the sense that we respect life enough to want to enhance it where we can, but it strikes me as incredibly strange and myopic to have this be the only soft spot where we'd even entertain the possibility to binding another person into this kind of arrangement against their will. You wanna talk about slippery slopes? That's one right there. The slope slides both ways, if we don't remain rational about this.

We can recognize the gravity of this issue without falling prey to emotional reactions. It's okay to discuss it in factual terms alone; it's a medical procedure, after all.

(May 21, 2014 at 3:30 pm)BlackSwordsman Wrote:

(May 21, 2014 at 3:25 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: Contradicting your narrative that a clump of cells is a person doesn't make it flawed logic.


Pretty messy.

Take a Biology class.

A clump of cells, is life.

Here is an into to Biology.

Enjoy

ASU School of Life Science: Biology Lesson

The ball is now in your court.

Cancer is also a clump of cells, therefore life.

Let's save cancer!