Or they might be another Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer, or Marjorie Taylor Green. That isn’t an effective argument.
Lol. The medical community calls it a heartbeat. Heck., PP calls it a heartbeat. I cited medical verbage yesterday calling it the "heart muscle". Again, an partially developed hand is still a hand. And for the 1 millionth time, no 9ne is claiming a 4 chambered heart exists at 6 weeks. No one is claiming a viable anything exists at 6 weeks. Thats a false argument that you guys keep throwing at the wall. Arent you the one that was babbling about non sequiturs?
I agree about consensus. What would be nice is a more fair discussion. For instance , the heartbeat issue. I have cited real tangible verbage from medical sources citing a beating heart muscle. One saying if such beating is undetectable at 7 weeks that is an alarm of danger. Yet all I get in return is the argument that it isnt a heart until its fully developed. The eyeball forming is the eye. The fingers forming are the fingers. The bones forming are the bones. Just very early examples. If someone is Ok with a viability position, I can at least understand the position. But calling the developing heart "just a bunch of cells" is just nonsensical. The fully developed heart is just a lump of cells too. It is just more sophisticated at that point. I know opinions change very slowly, but a developing thing (heart, eyes, fingers etc) are still those things. The fact that we cant agree on that and would rather play semantic games is just silly. Its why there is never hope for consensus on anything. And we all do it. I do it myself on issues sometimes. I used to play word games to justify my 2016 Trump support. ("Lesser 9f two evils" etc.) We all do it and thats why consensus never happens.
It’s just as likely one of these forced pregnancies will grow up to be a degenerate drunk driver who *kills* the person who would cure cancer, or be the politician who *starts* WW3. There’s really no reason to view it one way or the other on an individual level, but I’d still suggest there is no universe where the outcomes for “forced births” would be anything but statistically worse than the outcomes for planned/wanted pregnancies, perhaps meaningfully worse. You are just selectively choosing positive outcomes to confirm your own bias. These are little more than hypotheticals exhibiting some confirmation bias.
It isnt "just as likely". You have no idea. And you are just using negative hypotheticals exhibiting confirmation bias. There has been one Hitler and only a handful of similar historical evildoers. There have been thousands of great scientists. Thousands of great doctors, millions of great mentors, 100's of millions of great parents. The percentages do not say that it is "just as likely" that they become evil.
You named 3. Now tell me how many BILLIONS of great parents, teachers, mentors, doctors, scientists, there have been.
That's the dirty secret underlying all of these threads. The anti-abortion advocates posting here, and passing these laws, will never have to face the consequences they demand upon others. Not really. If push comes to shove, their wives and daughters and grand-daughters will have abortion access. They have the resources and ability to make it happen, if and when it needs to happen. They're never going to face a situation where the government forces one of their own to bring an embryo to term against their will. And they know it.
I ask why you’re okay with killing babies. You retort with why am I forcing babies to be born. Orwellian values-inversion.
You are playing word games here. I provided the definition of a heartbeat from NIH. What you described doesn't fit it. So you are now trying to play words games around what a heartbeat is. BTW, I never argued it isn't a heart until it is "fully" developed. That is you playing word games again to develop a straw man you would rather argue against. I argued it isn't one until it meets the definition of one, which does not require full development, but does require certain things not found at the stage you are using word games to try to support.
Have we arrived at a consensus here ? Can we all agree that abortions should be prohibited when the NIH says there’s a heartbeat ?
I’d like to see your source that says there is a “beating muscle” at six weeks. There is an electronic signal. The absence of a signal or a signal that is too fast or two slow at 7 weeks is a sign of danger, but I don’t recall seeing anything about a “beating muscle” at six weeks.
Geez. I didn’t say they would become “evil”. You raised the cancer cure unicorn. I just stated it’s just as likely to go the opposite way, or that Mr. Cancer cure could come along even in our current world, or that just one “forced birth” could result in killing someone who would have achieved, thus making that particular forced birth a massive negative. ANY of this could happen to an individual. Again, I’m not exhibiting any bias as far as these “unicorn hypotheticals” like Dr. Cures Cancer, I’m just saying it’s nonsensical speculation either way. However what isn’t in question is the population subset of “forced births” will have worse overall outcomes than the average for the total population. While a prediction - and thus not concrete data, it’s so obvious that it can be said with practically 100% certainty.
The negative rating probably has to do with your desire to take away the rights of others and belief that that would lead to a better society.
You fail to consider who you are forcing those pregnancies to term on. Women of means will always have access to safe, legal abortions...they always have, either with a "cooperative" doctor performing a "D&C" in their home state or by traveling to the nearest location where abortions are legal. Even women from middle class situations will likely have the ability to travel...Gainesville, Florida to the enlightened state of North Carolina is 524 miles. These abortion bans are going to hit lower class women the hardest, by far, and their forced births are far less likely to result in the next great scientist or doctor.
How about this? You go get Johns Hopkins, UF Health, NIH and the Cleveland Clinic to stop calling it a heartbeat at 6-7 weeks and then you might have an argument. Hell, even Planned Parenthood called it a heartbeat. Let me know when that happens.
