Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan
It's not the ablity of the mother versus the ablity of the unborn. The unborn child has life and the mother has life, life = life, there is no taking sides. With Pro-life both the mother and the unborn child are equally important, because both have life.
|
Most people with medical backgrounds laugh at this argument. You genocidal freak, how dare you shed your entire mass of body cells within seven years? Those cells ALL HAD LIFE! It's almost as silly as the religious Christians who argue that you are wasting potential life by masturbating or having sex with birth control. Your body produces millions of "possible lives" in the form of sperm or eggs that are never fertilized or will even have a remote possibility of becoming human. The question in this debate is, when does a fetus become human, and considering that spinal tissue and brain material don't develop until relatively late in a pregnancy (when very few abortions occur), it's really silly imo. In most cases an abortion as a medical procedure has more in common metaphorically and technically with excising a tumour than delivering a baby.
Fetuses (note, I didn't say babies)
are not human and therefore
do not have rights. The science doesn't support the "pro-life" argument, and religious belief should not affect lawmaking.