A subset of a group is not the entirety of a group. If a have a finger amputated, it doesn't mean I had my hand amputated, even though it is part of it.
If its not viable its nowhere near a person. And if it were viable no one is aborting it for convenience. Only for medical reasons that now scare the shit out of doctors so they are making bad bad decisions on healthcare now. Florida should just slide into the ocean. I could use some ocean frontage up this way.
Yes firing off impulses. Electrical signals. No beating heart. No heart at all in any meaningful sense. So are you disputing the quoted pediatric cardiologists who are specifically saying it isn’t a beating heart?
Lol. Exactly. Again, no one is claiming an entirely complete heart at that point. Just that the heart, however immature and undeveloped has begun existing and has begun to fire the impulses known as a beat.
Based on what does an embryo have rights? What if the woman is like… no, worm, I expel you from my body. You are giving a worm rights above sensient being? It makes absolutely no sense. What about frozen embryos. Is a woman now not allowed to have them destroyed? This stuff gets into insanity territory quite quickly when you move back from 15 weeks (pre-cognitive baby-ish creature) to 6 weeks or conception which more resembles simple organisms. If we are looking at it through a spiritual lens. What am I supposed to picture in my mind? The ghost of the fully formed adult version of this embryo cursing down at the mother for denying their existence on earth? Or some freaky place like Catholic limbo with ghost babies and ghost embryos just piled up for all time?
Picture what you wish. I am picturing a better society where we dont just eliminate so many before they ever have a chance to be productive humans.
It is not a heart. It isn't immature or "undeveloped." It does not exist as a "heart." By definition. And electrical impulses are not a heartbeat, as I showed you with the definition of heartbeat, which is not defined by electical impulses.
Do you share this concern for the *trillions* of actual sentient organisms wiped out by humans, or just for these non-sentient “humans” in worm form? If we are strictly looking at society, how does it benefit society to force women to carry from the point of conception? I expect history is a guide, and women will still terminate their pregnancies at very similar rates regardless of laws (so it will just be the next failed prohibition). But hypothetically, let’s say we actually do force some degree of additional births and start jailing/executing women who “illegally” abort to make examples of them. Having more “unwanted children” and jailed women. This benefits society? How?
Would the addled among you be okay if abortions were disallowed at which point at which scientific consensus pointed to heartbeat.
So if the world could eliminate the 40 million abortions every year, would the world be a better place?
Women did not terminate 1M per year when it wasnt legal. And I dont disagree that it creates other issues (albeit in smaller numbers). Lets not act like all abortions are necessarily based on the situations you mention. Lots of rich white suburbanites getting abortions out of convenience. I believe you solve the issue at hand. If that solution creates problems you then solve those. That is how a society works. Ad for other sentient beings... If they arent human, than whats the issue? We kill all sorts of non human creatures for all sorts of reasons. Food, clothing etc.
Yet another post that I cant believe got a negative rating. Who on either side can disagree with this???
Well never know. One might cure cancer. Would it be a better place then? One might be a great political leader that prevents WW3. Would the world be a better place then? One may be a great scientist that prevents a global pandemic. Would it be a better place then? An overwhelming majority will be good contributing citizens that add to economies and pay taxes. I mean lets stop acting like they all end up being train wrecks. And I dont vote or represent 40M. I vote and represent THIS country. We should lead the world in solutions, not join it in throwing up our hands.
Ive decided after 28 pages no consensus is possible. Probably best just to leave the decision up to individuals themselves... or abdicate that right to Desantis and old men in government. Whatever, its only freedom.
Almost all of the people born because abortion was denied them arent going to be born to families that saved for them to go to college and cure cancer lol. Certainly in this country where you have to pay for all those things and people are bent on turning public education into a place where you dont learn anything, except maybe that Jesus rode dinosaurs and such. You would make a better case arguing the world needs sex workers and domestic help for the people that might cure cancer. With the loosening of child labor laws it looks like we need more 14 year olds doing adult jobs too. We sure as shit dont make raising children affordable in this country, so much so they apparently are vital to the low end work force.
Actually, yes women *did* terminate pregnancies before its legality was restored. You think it went to 0 to 750k in one year after Roe??? From the historical charts, the numbers did shoot up dramatically for a period in the 80’s, before going into long trend decline with more sexual education and access to birth control and contraceptives. Yet no method is perfect, women still accidentally get pregnant and there are those who are unequipped (such as teen mothers, mothers of children who don’t want more mouths to feed, mentally ill or irresponsible single women without stable life situations). The “rich suburbanite” is more likely to be educated and take measures. But accidents still happen, and they’d probably be most likely on top of doing a medication abortion or early term abortion which morally doesn’t bother me in the slightest. The vision of these women waiting 8 months and then killing their near term baby is propaganda. It’s from charlatans pitching all abortions as some sort of infanticide. Statistically we know these abortions are very rare. Problem is if the rich and educated are most likely to avoid unwanted pregnancies, and may have the resources to skirt these crazy laws - it stands to reason the least equipped are the ones that will be either forced to carry to term or will be prosecuted for “illegal” abortions. That is who will suffer.
Tilly is actually correct and so are you. The SA node is detected at around 35 days, but that isn’t a heart. We don’t have a four chambered heart until 17-20 weeks. That’s when an actual heartbeat can be detected with a stethoscope. So the question isn’t when there’s a heartbeat, but what is considered to be a heartbeat. Is it when electrical activity is detected, or when a doctor can actually hear the lub dup from the fetal heart? I believe it’s the latter because you can’t call it a heartbeat if it’s coming from a tube of cardiac cells vibrating. To think otherwise would be like calling cake batter a cake before it’s been put in the oven. The definition should be left up to the medical community, not politicians or theologians. If they say it’s a heartbeat at six weeks then I’ll believe them.
