Welcome to Gaia! ::

Maybe you're debating with someone who's stupid? (No offense) Almost all of them know it's human, but, the ones that say it isn't actually do know it's human... they just mean, it's not a person like us. It's real obvious it's a human! whee Just say that since the parents are humans then the fetus has to be of the same species. Ask them if it's possible that a platypus would be growing in a woman's womb instead of a human fetus.

Show that a fetus is human? Man that's funny xd

"It might very well be a honda!" What the heck do they think it is?

There is NO denying that it is a human. There isn't even a way to deny it's a separate entity from the mother. Three simple letters. DNA.

If they mean personhood? State your definition of what a person is. The other person states his or her definition. You'll both be right, because you'll both be using your own definitions. Personhood is subjective.

You can argue legality of killing a person. They will take you to McFall v. Shimp to explain that even if a fetus is a person, it has no right to use the mother's body. That is the legal precedent.

The problem with this is that pregnancy is a new situation. Pregnancy involves your child (if indeed a fetus is a person, it is your child. In fact, even if it isn't, it's your child, but if it's not a person then it doesn't really matter that it's your child). Parents have certain obligations to their children, or they are charged with neglect. You are not allowed to kill your child to remove him or her from your house. You are not allowed to starve your child to death in order to keep your food for yourself. You must sacrifice your privacy, your money, your resources or you are charged with child abuse. If a fetus is indeed a person, you are abusing your child by killing it.

This argument isn't accepted by everyone. It's completely subjective that abortion would constitute as child abuse, since the above situation doesn't involve bodily autonomy, just autonomy in general. Parents do not have to give their children the use of organs if their children are dying. On the other hand, if a child needs breastmilk and there is no other way to get it available except for the child suckling the woman's breast, it is child abuse if she lets it starve to death. This situation doesn't really happen in developed countries, though, so there's no legal precedent for it. That situation involves a mother being obligated to let her child use her body.

There is no situation comparable to pregnancy. It's so unique, no comparisons come close.

The reason a lot of us in here don't debate anymore? It's rehashing the same arguments over and over again. No one wins. No one loses. Because most of this is subjective. There's no way to define what a person is, since legal =/= right. If it did, slavery and the holocaust would've been perfectly alright, since legally, no people were abused/died. In reality? Millions of people throughout history have been hurt and or killed, even if they weren't considered people legally. Both sides want to legislate morality; that's what law is about.

You're right. It's the undecided people who are going to be hurt by us leaving. And that's the only reason I did it for awhile. I hate debating. It was affecting my health though; my health hasn't been very good lately. Well that's not true, lately it's been improving, but a few years ago I was bed-ridden and pretty emotionally distraught, so things like debating really did affect me badly.

If they say, "Ha ha we win!" because you choose not to continue, they're silly and inflating their egos.

Well that excludes half of the prochoicers from being human themselves!

I'm not sure who it was, but it was one of our more well known members that actualy contacted some one in tat area of knowledge about whether or not a fetus is a parasite. The person almost flatley stated the fetus fails at the "parasite test"

It's virtually impossible to change the views of a pro-choicer, as much as it is to change the mind of a pro-lifer. Like lymelady said, personhood is subjunctive. Unless you can prove to a pro-choicer that a fetus is a person, it's impossible.


Also, I got a question: How many of you think organ donations should be mandatory in order to save someone's life?

The only thing that comes to mind is....

"Duh."