Nope.
That is a dog fetus.
Crazy that the difference isn’t apparent.
3 Likes
Logical fallacy alert.
None of these arguments make sense.
X’s faith teaches that murder is wrong.
X considers murder to be wrong.
Therefore X considers murder to be wrong only because her/his faith requires him/her to do so.
X lobbies against murder.
X has faith Y.
Therefore X is lobbying against murder only because his/her faith requires it.
X believes in a form of theism and Z believes in a form of atheism.
Prohibitions against murder are found both in the writings influencing X and the writings influencing Z.
But when both are lobbying against murder only one must be forcing their beliefs on others.
That kind of supercilious response is why I can’t take your posts seriously, Jezcoe. We are discussing human fetuses and embryos. Your posting some picture which looks similar to a human fetus to imply the dog-look-alike human fetus is not fully human is logically flawed. There are adults who look somewhat like their dogs. Does that make them also only partly human?
I posted a picture of a dog embryo at six weeks to point out how the it is impossible to make a comparison between what we all would consider to be a living and breathing human and any mammal at six weeks in gestation.
Babies are babies and are protected as such.
An embryo does not have the capacity of knowing that it exists thus is indistinguishable from from the picture that I posted that you assumed was human.
Life is precious. That is the moral high ground. I agree with that.
But there is this other moral concept of body autonomy and that is also precious.
It is the meeting of these two concepts where the abortion debate exists.
None of this is clear cut or simple. This is an issue about rights shifting between two people inhabiting the same body as time progresses. But… in case of the life of the mother the rights of the fetus are always secondary.
The rights of the living always supersede the rights of those who are yet to be born.
But the legislation that is being proposed ignores this balance.
Why is that?
2 Likes
Make them wear a special shirt.
No … that a living breathing baby is equal to an embryo that is six weeks along in it’s development is a biological fact not a moral issue. Both are 100% living human beings. What you are saying now is an additional argument than the one I responded to.
But yes, what you just said is horrific. And so is ripping apart a living human fetus and sucking it out of the womb with a vacuum. Both are morally reprehensible. As I have said several times, there can be no good resolution to this situation.
a) To the naked eye some thing looks like other things.
b) There is nothing wrong with treating alike things that look alike to the naked eye.
Therefore c) Dog fetuses and human fetuses should be treated alike.
Does anyone see a flaw in Jezcoe’s reasoning here?
Really? How many dog embryos would be found in a woman’s womb annually worldwide?
The moral thing to do is to end it and support the little girl in the hope she will recover. End of story.
2 Likes
No, that was my point. I understand why you want to do it. And I find that to be grotesque.
There is a good outcome. Counsel the girl that the child inside her is as blameless and as innocent a victim as herself and by having compassion on the child and carrying it until it is able to be safely delivered, she will be able to know for the rest of her life that, faced with a choice between what seemed easier and what was right, she had had the courage and compassion to do the right thing. The alternative is forever to wonder if what she did to the baby was wrong.
You’re expecting an 11-year-old to have the ability to comprehend such decisions the way an adult would.
There’s a reason we don’t let kids drive, have guns, drink alcohol, own homes. There’s a reason kids don’t pay mortgages, balance check books, etc. They’re kids.
11 year olds are 5-6th graders. I teach those kids. They’re struggling with math, reading, what clothes to wear, trying to get away with hiding their phones while using them in class, dealing with their parents separating, being raised by their grandparents, when is my next meal outside of school, does little Johnny/Susie like me, will I make the team. Puberty.
And not only that, but their bodies simply aren’t prepared to carry a child. There’s no “safe” way for an 11-year-old to deliver a child.
No, what you’re advocating is telling the 11 year old to do what you want her to do, and hoping she will do what you want her to, because she does not have the ability to grasp the gravity of the situation on her own.
If God exists, then God will welcome the innocent spirit back to heaven that was created via the rape that God did not stop from happening, and God will have mercy on the 11-year-old for being put in a situation that she neither has the age nor wisdom to reconcile.
7 Likes
There used to be a time when the pro choice and pro life side would agree that in the case of rape that abortion was acceptable.
The woman or 11 year old girl did not consent to having sex and therefore had no choice to in becoming pregnant.
Her autonomy, the right to her body had been taken away by force and therefore making her carry to term was a moral line that was not willing to be crossed.
The entire debate is about balancing the right to life and a person’s bodily autonomy and when that choice of autonomy has been removed in the first place that it is a further sin to force a woman to carry the product of that rape to term.
I don’t know when people became radicalized away from that common ground of human decency, but it is rather disturbing that it has happened.
It is also rather disturbing that someone cannot see that body autonomy Is not a moral issue.
2 Likes
The point is that if you cannot tell that at six weeks in gestation, an embryo the size of a pea cannot be considered to be equal to a fully birthed baby.
This is about rights and to confer the same rights on something the size of a pea that lacks a brain, heart, lungs, etc to a living breathing baby is quite silly.
If one cannot readily tell the difference between a dog and a person then what does that say about the issue?
To me it says that people have become radicalized into believing that an eleven year old girl being forced to carry to term the product of her being raped has really thrown some people’s … more than I like to imagine… moral compasses way out of whack.
You can’t tell the difference.
Yet it was argued that a dog would become a human.
That is how crazy this whole thing has become.
One is arguing that something the size of a pea has more rights than the woman whose body it inhabits.
2 Likes
The hindenburg didnt go down this fast
1 Like
Been lurking here for awhile I like that this forum actually has both sides debating.
With that said it seems that the pro life crowd is basing their idea of the sanctity of life based on religious morals.
Has god killed babies?
1 Like
I just googled “youngest mothers”.
If she can get pregnant she can carry the child until it can be viably delivered by caesarean. How can your claim be true when the youngest mother ever was five years and seven months old?
“Lina Medina. Lina Marcela Medina de Jurado (Spanish pronunciation: [ˈlina meˈðina]; born 23 September 1933) is a Peruvian woman who became the youngest confirmed birth mother in medical history, giving birth at the age of five years, seven months, and 21 days.”
“In the modern era, 12 is a tragically young age to give birth in developed nations. That’s a cultural fact rather than physical one, though: Twelve-year-old mothers aren’t unusual in some parts of the world.”
You are pretending to advocate for the child in order to push your own selfish death-cult agenda. You don’t care about her long term mental health at all.
Why is “to end it” also part of your “moral thing to do”?
