(April 25, 2015 at 7:04 pm)Hatshepsut Wrote:(April 24, 2015 at 7:43 am)polar bear Wrote: In the minds of fundies, a fetus is alive when the first cell splits. I am not sure that 2 cells have a soul...
Yet it's obvious that first cell is alive. It even has its own genome, distinct from the parents.' Why the shrill cries of "mass of cells" anyway? The abortion issue isn't really about whether the fetus is alive, or even whether it has a soul. It's a question of whether the fetus' "right to life" outweighs the "right of women not to be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies." Both of these rights are reasonable. A fetus has a definite interest in its chance to be born whether it's able to articulate that or not. Pregnancy represents a major burden on the mother. Nor do women generally seek abortions in a cavalier way, "for convenience," as we keep hearing from the anti-sin crowd. Roe v. Wade attempts to resolve the conundrum via a compromise with arbitrarily demarked "trimesters." Perhaps unsatisfying to the partisans on all sides, yet workable in our day and age.
Could you explain the bolded part more? How does anything have an interest in being born if it doesn't have a brain that is formed enough to care?
Even if that is their slogan, the prolife movement isn't about 'the right to life'. If they cared about the right to life, pro lifers(I detest that term) wouldn't be so many who believe in the death penalty or seem so crazily pro war. The fact that most pro lifers are Christian means that the way that they view fetuses is different than nonChristians. Many modern Christians feel that the soul is part of the fetus at conception.
http://www.christianpost.com/news/gallup...ife-75772/ (Link to prove that most pro lifers are Christian.)
Here is another article. Jewish people, for the most part, believe in the right of a woman to abortion. Why? Because they believed that the soul became part of the child at a later stage of development than modern Christians do.
http://www.jewishjournal.com/judaismands...n_abortion
