I have always heard that babies aren't 'alive' until birth. Until then, they are just a mass of cells. Yet we consider germs alive, and they are often singular cells, and in the case of a virus, we really have to twist the definition of 'alive' to make them living.
I find it hard to believe that abortionists consider an unborn baby 'not alive'.
Can anyone help me with this paradox?
2007-01-16 00:43:41 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
There is a lot more money to be made killing babies, than there is killing germs.
It's all about Money & Power.
2007-01-16 01:01:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
~Comparing germs to cells of a baby are two entirely different things. Germs are out to hurt you while cells of a baby are in the process of making something, it's not leading to an infection.
I believe babies are alive before their born. I would not recommend an abortion after the first trimester. Who knows EXACTLY when a baby is alive?~
2007-01-16 01:00:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sigh... well, let's see how well we do here.
It's actually a legal definition, based on a set of facts about all living things.
1. Can it seek out nourishment? Fetuses cannot, while germs and viruses can and do.
2. Can it survive and reproduce? Again, see above.
The question YOU should be asking is, ARE FETUSES SELF AWARE? And if so, at what point in their gestation ARE they self-aware? Answer that question and we can start a real discussion about your "paradoxes".
Look Im not trying to insult your belief system, but I am a man, and as such, I HAVE NO RIGHT TO AN OPINION ABOUT A WOMAN'S WOMB. If you're a man, neither do you. You asked a trick question about germs and babies, hoping for an emotional response. And please don't preach to me about the 'sanctity of life", as we ship another 22,000 young men (I mean, fetuses in their 84th trimester) to war.
2007-01-16 00:56:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Interesting comparison, but you're a little off on the point at which a fetus is considered a living person. The fetus is considered alive at the point when the heart starts pumping blood to the brain. This happens a few months after conception, long before birth.
It is at that point, when blood is delivered to the brain, when the fetus comes under the protection of the constitution and cannot be aborted.
98% of Americans agree with you, myself included, and think life starts at conception.
2007-01-16 01:03:01 · answer #4 · answered by Overt Operative 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
i'm neither for or hostile to abortion. i'm for the right of females to settle on, Too a lot of human beings favor to regulate what a lady does. there is also the point to be made that no human being somewhat is acquainted with at the same time as existence starts. it is the position the mission lies. some will argue that it starts at idea and some say at start. With that suggested it continues to be the girl's decision. not me or you or everybody else can understand nor ought to we why she makes a decision in this decision. Being previous adequate to save in recommendations at the same time as abortion changed into unlawful i'm extremely joyful females have a decision now.
2016-12-02 08:55:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your argument misses the point that 'alive' as used in respect of fetusses is not used to determine mere life; but is merely a legal term to denote the assigning of legal rights. A fetus is alive from the moment that it becomes a fetus, but that does not mean it is a person.
Trees are alive as well, but that has absolutely nothing to do with when a person is considered to be 'alive' in legal sense.
2007-01-16 01:07:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
How about this paradox? Last week a new born beautiful baby was left on the doorstep of a nursing home. The same abortion proponents were appalled at this. Any yet, if the mother had contacted an abortion clinic the baby would have been killed legally. More liberal hypocrisy.
2007-01-16 00:49:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
Now amoeba's have Civil Rights when the Neocon Patriot Act takes them away. Your creating a oxymoron, and more Neocon nonsense.
2007-01-16 01:51:41 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think that we can all agree, both are living organisms. This is scientific FACT.
The issue is: is it WRONG to kill (destroy, terminate, etc) these cells? I know what my belief is; those of you who are reading this can decide for yourselves...
(To the hostile person who answered above: please don't label me a 'Bible-thumper.' Murder is not wrong because the Bible says so, it is wrong because it is intrinsically evil. So is stealing for that matter).
2007-01-16 01:05:03 · answer #9 · answered by Truth B. Told ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
ever see a fetus live on a door nob for 3 days???? I do not agree with Abortion as a front line method of birth control but I do believe in it.
2007-01-16 00:51:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Sure! germs are one celled organisms,but they are complete organisms for their species.Humans are not considered complete orginisms until birth.Potential life is not life.
2007-01-16 01:40:30 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋