Atheists, the death penalty and abortion...

[catfish]

Not quite... It's an attempt at rationalizing the killing of the thing.
Perhaps you'd like to explore the definition of parasite? At what point does a human-parasite stop being a parasite?

Isn't that evident?
When it can function by it self, without the need for a host.

Then by your defininition, newborn children and comatose patients on lifesupport should also be considered parasites.

[CleanShavenJesus]

First trimester or you suck.

LOL

[festive1]

Isn't that evident?
When it can function by it self, without the need for a host.

Then by your defininition, newborn children and comatose patients on lifesupport should also be considered parasites.

No. Newborns and the comatose simply need food and basic care. Infants born prematurely do not even possess the skills of suckling and swallowing without aspirating. They cannot regulate their body temperature. They have no immune system. Very different from a newborn or someone in a coma.

[Shell B]

Yep. Besides, when was the last time you heard about a coma patient being attached to a living thing to survive? "Oh, yes, doctor, please attach this coma patient to me so it can live off of my nutrients." Ever the genius, eh?

[catfish]

It's still a human, no matter what adjective you attach to it.

[genkaus]

Not quite... It's an attempt at rationalizing the killing of the thing.
Perhaps you'd like to explore the definition of parasite? At what point does a human-parasite stop being a parasite?

When it is born.

Is a human zygote/fetus a human, or some other species?

Which definition of species are you using here?

---

Then by your defininition, newborn children and comatose patients on lifesupport should also be considered parasites.

Nope. Because they are not biologically being supported by a host.

---

It's still a human, no matter what adjective you attach to it.

You still haven't proven that - simply repeated ad naseum.

[catfish]

[The Grand Nudger]

Personally against both, I'd argue for the abolition of capital punishment but not the criminalization of abortion.

[pocaracas]

It's still a human, no matter what adjective you attach to it.

It's human, it's a parasite... it's a lot of things.

Do you think a woman who has an abortion deserves some sort of punishment?
A fine? To go to jail? To do community work?

What if she's having an abortion because her husband will beat her if she doesn't?
What if she's having an abortion because she knows she'll lose her job if she goes on maternity leave?
And a gazillion other reasons why women have abortions....?
(not going into rape, that one's been done to death)

I'm not a woman, so I probably shouldn't have a saying in this. But I am entitled to an opinion and my opinion is that, at it's core, cat, you're right. It's wrong to kill. It's even wronger to kill a human being.
But there are situations where we shouldn't decide for others. Each case is a case and it should be up to the person involved to decide what to do. What is the best course of action, for the "greater good".
Of course, as is the case with any decent/sensible political position, some people will abuse it, that's why it makes sense that some line is drawn, and, to me, that line should be drawn at the point when the parasite may survive on its own, with some leeway for caution, hence my previous notion of 15~20 weeks gestation, noting that the first 2 are virtual (doctors start counting gestation at the last period).
If the practice is legally persecuted, then women will have to do it illegally, possibly at home, or at someone else's home, instead of in a proper medical facility. If I was a woman and had the specter of one day needing to go through this procedure, I'd prefer to do it in a hospital/clinic, instead of at home, just in case anything goes wrong.... no point in having two deaths when one was planned.

[KichigaiNeko]

Her body...her choice.

why should this offend male religious persons?