Is it murder when you have your appendix removed? No, because the appendix can't survive outside the body of the human body which hosts it. What about the spleen? What about the ovaries? What about your tonsils? An embryo is not a human being much as Christian whack jobs would like to think it is. Keep your laws off of other people's bodies. If you don't like abortions, don't have one but mind your own business.
2006-09-27 13:56:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by spongeworthy_us 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
Its an age old debate. My personal opinion is that it cannot be considered a human being until it can live outside the womb. A little example...we determine our birthday by the day we were born (able to live outside the womb) not by when we are conceived. On a tombstone is says the birth date that the person began living in the world not the date they are conceived. If that makes any sense, its kind of a stupid example, but...
And Also many people would agree that it IS murder but still see it as a valid option for a pregnant woman. So they see it as murder that is justified, kind of like the death penalty. But honestly I dont think we will ever come to an agreement about this, its always going to be controversial
2006-09-27 13:51:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
A miscarriage wouldn't be involuntary manslaughter because a miscarriage, early ones anyway, are from natural causes like genetic problems that no one can help or prevent. But I dunno, maybe one that resulted from something the mother unknowlingly did would be.
But honestly, I don't get the comments that say that a baby isn't a human until it's capable of living on its own. It might be completely dependent physically but it's still a human, it's got its own DNA and its own life. Your appendix won't grow to develop its own human form and personality, I can tell you that. I am 37 weeks pregnant. The baby could live outside me if she had to. But who knows what point that begins at. So you're saying 20 weeks ago she may or may not have been a human being. Besides, when a baby's born it's still got no chance without its mother (which is biologically intended) or some other human. Nowadays a baby can thrive without its mother's milk but centuries ago this wasn't the case, it was still dependent on the mother. So at what point is a baby capable of being physically independent? It probably differs and it's too hard to say. But I think it's more than a ball of cells, it's still its own human being, no matter the size.
Women have their reasons for getting abortions and though I haven't I do understand the situation and why some do it. Many of them do know it's more than a ball of cells, though.
2006-09-27 14:39:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
A fetus does not have a heartbeat from the time it is conceived. At conception your oocyte has not even undergone meiosis II. At the point of fertilization you have a triploid cell. The egg (oocyte) quickly undergoes the final division and gets rid of its extra set of chromosomes by releasing a polar body. Many things can go wrong right at first. You have to have the morula shed the fertilization envelope to even have the cadherins exposed to bind the uterine wall. At seven days post fertilization you only have a blastocyst that has implanted into the uterine wall and is beginning to form connections with the female blood vessels for nourishment. At almost any step during early development many things can go wrong. It is a miracle that anyone is born functional and normal at all when you start to find out how many proteins are involved and how many pathways there are. So little is known about development too. So there are even more things that could go wrong. At 16 days post fertilization gastrulation is just beginning. The primitive groove and node have formed and cells will begin involuting through the node to form the 3 primary germ layers.
2006-09-27 13:57:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by musicmonkey_73 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Like this, "Abortion is not murder."
A fetus is not a human being. It is a cluster of cells that has the potential of becoming a human being. Just like an acorn is a potential oak tree. It contains all of the DNA of an oak tree, but it is not an oak tree.
Abortion is not a violation of any "person's" right, because there is no such thing as the freedom to live inside (or outside) of another human being as a parasite, i.e., against the will of that person.
2006-09-27 14:00:27
·
answer #5
·
answered by mrpeabody 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's not just opinion love, its fact. By the time a woman knows she is pregnant, the embryo already has a heartbeat. After 8 weeks (2months) the baby has everything it needs to develop into a self sufficient human being. I don't think people who say that it isn't murder really believe that it isn't. Just 'georgebushing' a bad decision.
2006-09-27 14:07:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by Baby 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
That's fine that you have this opinion about abortion and no one should try to sway you otherwise. You need to understand that there are others who have other opinions and that they probably don't appreciate words such as "murder" to describe a choice that they made. It's so great that we can have a discussion like this and that's exactly why we need to make sure that the CHOICE is always available for women. We live in a free country where we should be able to govern our own bodies and our own health! Both sides need to come together- we need more sex education, opportunities for young people who decide to have premarital sex to have access to birth control, and to protect the choice of a woman to decide what's best for her health and her body. PROTECT CHOICE!!!
2006-09-27 18:00:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by curious 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I believe that every person recieves their soul when conception occors. From that time they are their own person, a living human being whose entire life stretches out before them. This new life doesn't care how it came to be, regardless of how or why it happened, or who's its parents are. As much as some would like to think, humans are not and should not pretend to be god. It is not our right to pick and choose who will survive to be brought into this world. As mothers we should cherish each new life and do all we can do raise our young ones the best that we possible can. If a mother feels she is not in the position to do so, their are other options such as adoption. Why abort when there are so many loving couples in want of a baby and who can not have one of their own?
2006-09-27 15:56:08
·
answer #8
·
answered by dolly 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Scenario:
You are only 13, you are taken advantage by a 24 year old and now your pregnant. You have 2 choices, have it or abort it.
If you have it you lose your education, what is left of your childhood and teen years, you will be kicked out and your grandmother is so scared for you she says she is going to have a heart attack.
You abort it & try to live a normal life without innocence.
Easy huh? Nope.... you do as your told, learn to live with it then have self righteous people like you who have not clue one spout off about something you know nothing about personally.
You are the same people who look at the homeless and turn up your nose. The same ones who preach forgiveness and compassion then go to church and judge everyone else.
2006-09-27 14:24:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by mommakaye 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
i can certainly understand your logic. this is a major argument for those who call themselves pro-life advocates. my theory is, if the fetus is incapable of living outside the womb, then it is not viable and therefore to terminate it is not murder. once past about 25 weeks of gestational age, premature babies have lived and thrived with extensive medical support. i would have to agree that past this (age) would have to be considered murder. the problem is, everyone sees it differently. who has the right to make such a choice? i don't want someone who doesn't know me or my situation to decide if i am capable and ready of birthing and raising a child.
2006-09-27 13:58:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by ŧťŠ4
·
3⤊
0⤋