How to shut up people who are against abortion

[That guy who asked questions]

I typically disagree with abortion simply because I define person-hood at conception and I usually hold the moral that killing is wrong. I don't see how anyone with a comprehensive knowledge of human prenatal development could support abortion to be honest.

And I fail to see how anyone with a comprehensive knowledge of human prenatal development couldn't support abortion. Based on the fact that you "define person-hood at conception" I think we can safely say you have little to no lnowledge of human prenatal development.

Actually, I think you're pretty uninformed on this. Fortunately, I have a college education in the human anatomy and development field so I really don't give two shits or three fucks as to what you "think" about my knowledge of human prenatal development.

To the argument, "abortion = bad but abandonment = better = hypocrisy." I would ask the question, what if the person that was killed developed a cure for cancer and you developed cancer? What if instead of being aborted, that same person lived but didn't go through life with their biological parents? Which of these is the better alternative for them and you? I think it would be agreed that life is better than death, even a life separated from your mother and/or father.

What of they could cure cancer? I can play that game, what if they could become a murderer? Murderers are far more common, you know.
And no, I don't agree that a life without your biological mother is better than death. Not in the slightest.

You're quite right, it is a game, but the metaphor was potential good vs. potential bad. I think it is pretty clear that the potential for good is much more likely than the potential for bad, maybe not in the sense of curing cancer, but as I said, it was a metaphor.

To the argument, "Pro-life individuals want to make decisions for others." I would say, this isn't true. Not for me at least. I can't represent all pro-life individuals because I am not many. I would ask the question, "What if someone had the power to legally end your life without your consent?" Would you be opposed to the ending of your life or would you simply say it's their choice as to whether they think your life should end? Any rational and sane person would respectfully tell them to put the fucking knife away because you have the right to your life.

Wtf is this here? Why would someone legally hold the power to end my life without my consent? Are we talking about if I lived in some backward country that still has the death penalty? That's an entirely different situation, because you're talking about an actual person with thoughts and feelings, not an unconscious bunch of cells. Pro-lifers are trying to make decisions for millions of pregnant women to ruin their vaginas as well as their lives.

No, I am not referring to the death penalty. I would explain the metaphor to you but I don't think it'd do much good for an intelligent respectful discussion, not debate because I am neither for nor against abortion. If you're concerned with your vagina, then get a c-section, which is actually worse seeing as how your vagina would return to normal condition after child birth.

The voice of the prenatal human is unheard and therefore we cannot ask them if they would like to live, but the question that must be asked is, "If you were in the position of the soon to be aborted child, would you want to live or die?"

If I was in yhe position of a soon to be aborted child I wouldn't want anything because I wouldn't have any ability to bloody think or feel. That's the point. A house fly is more "alive" than a foetus.

Abortion is better for a kid then adoption? Sorry but that makes no sense.

The "kid" doesn't get to exist if it's aborted, so yeah. Not existing is better than the mental fucked-upness of knowing your mother didn't love or want you. Also, keeping a baby just to give it away keeps children who already exist stuck in foster care for far longer, waiting for a family to adopt them.

To my quote, You consider a house fly more "alive" than a baby? Why do you consider a more complete and organized set of cells more alive than a fewer number of cells that are less organized? Would the cells of the fetus not become more complete and organized? Would those cells not become a conscious sentient being? You're saying that the fewer cells shouldn't be considered alive because they aren't a complete group of cells, but would you be alive without the cells that make you? You can't say that something isn't alive just because it's just masses of developing cells because you, in your current state, are nothing more than masses of developing cells. Secondly, you say I don't have the knowledge of human prenatal development but you seem to not realize that a fetus is more than a cluster of cells! A fetus is essentially a complete human body and isn't considered a fetus until then. Also all of the following are developed during the embryonic stage: eyes, ears, brain, circulatory system, complete cartilaginous skeleton, mouth, kidneys, liver, brain waves, reaction to stimuli and movement, a face, and hands and feet all of which is done within 8 weeks of pregnancy!

To the other quote, 1. A fully developed neonate-adolescent may not "exist" but that doesn't mean the being doesn't exist. 2. You're confusing "existence" and "living" the discussion isn't regarding the existence of an unborn baby. It's regarding to its life, so what you're saying is that not living is better than dealing with emotional distress from not knowing your biological mother, since you obviously don't give a shit as to whether the father is even in the picture. You've made it clear though that any child that is going to be without its biological mother should pretty much die though, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you're more biased to death than emotional distress. Might wanna talk to a therapist about that. I hear suicide isn't exactly the best option. 3. I think you're pretty biased. You make a black and white option that if a mother gives her child up for adoption they automatically don't love them. This is nothing more than an assumption, probably based on personal experience, that is not a good argument for every person that considers adoption. It's also an assumption that any child that doesn't know their biological mother will be mentally "fucked-up." This cannot be a representation for anyone because each individual encounters a different life experience. Many people that experience intense emotional distress go on to live normal joyful lives, just as individuals who experience little no emotional distress from their parents go on to be very messed-up individuals. "What if someone had the power to legally end your life without your consent?" I gave this metaphor to give insight to a mind that can't be communicated with from one that can. The old put yourself in their shoes argument. Maybe you can claim that abortion is perfectly fine because of negative experiences from your own life, or someone you may know, but it doesn't make it true for all lives, the problem is that we obviously will never know because the aborted will never develop enough to effectively communicate with us.

To anyone who is pro-life because of delusions of "personhood":
Imagine I have in one hand, a dish containing 100 embryos, and in the other hand, a week old baby. Now imagine I have to drop one, and YOU have to choose which one I drop. Which do you choose? The dish, right? Right?

A "no-win" argument is a bad argument. All you're doing is giving the options of death and death. It's like how the god of the bible says, "do it my way or be tortured!" All you've done is give an extremely biased and disrespectful response based on your own opinionated assumptions.

---

Up to 12~15 weeks gestation, the fetus is noticeably a very underdeveloped or just a bunch of cells and an abortion is just chemically induced and feels much like a standard period.
So, up to this "age", it's not a big deal to abort. The fetus doesn't feel anything

Actually, at about 9 weeks the baby has a sensory system intact and responds to stimuli and is capable of feeling and is about ten times more sensitive to stimuli than an adult. sooooo...